en

Public Comment

Public Comment is a vital part of our multistakeholder model. It provides a mechanism for stakeholders to have their opinions and recommendations formally and publicly documented. It is an opportunity for the ICANN community to effect change and improve policies and operations.

Name: Zak Muscovitch
Date: 19 Apr 2022
Affiliation: Internet Commerce Association
Summary of Attachment

Please see the attached submission of the Internet Commerce Association, in PDF format.

Summary of Submission

An effective, fair, and legitimate UDRP must balance both protection of intellectual property rights and the protection of domain name registrant rights.

Our members include many owners of valuable generic domain names who have been the victim of meritless Complaints and Reverse Domain Name Hijacking attempts. Our members also include many of the leading defenders of domain name registrants who have collectively defended against hundreds of meritless UDRP cases. Our members have sometimes been forced to go to court to overturn errant UDRP decisions.

It has been nearly 23 years since the UDRP was adopted and even a generally successful policy should be reviewed. Much has been learned from the way that the UDRP has operated since then and this experience can and should be used to identify those limited and focused areas where the UDRP can be improved. 

The ICA strongly believes that the UDRP can be an effective tool for combatting cybersquatting without undermining the rights of lawful participants in the domain name aftermarket. The ICA seeks limited and focused improvements to the UDRP to help prevent domain name investors from being inadvertently caught in the crossfire between brand owners and cybersquatters.

The ICA strongly believes that improvements to the UDRP are not a “zero-sum game” in which improvements that benefit domain name registrants necessarily harm trademark owners or vice versa. There is ample opportunity to improve the UDRP for all concerned stakeholders. 

The ICA is committed to working with all stakeholder groups and outside experts to improve the UDRP. Phase 2 must not be a competitive, fraught, and lengthy exercise. Rather, by looking only towards improvements that are likely capable of earning consensus support, the UDRP can be successfully maintained and improved for all.