es

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.

Contenido disponible solo en los siguientes idiomas

  • English

Name: Shyamal Bagchi
Date: 19 Apr 2022
Affiliation: INDIA AGAINST CORRUPTION
Other Comments

Comments filed on behalf of INDIA AGAINST CORRUPTION ("IAC") concerning the WIPO UDRP Case No. D2014-2261

1. Query 1: IAC disputes that UDRP is a fast and effective solution for domain name disputes. In the cited matter the Complainant WIKIMEDIA INC paid over US$300,000 in WIPO fees and Legal fees to M/s Jones Day, whereas the IAC had purchased the domain name for US$1 only, paid no legal fees through self representation, and were more than willing to get the domain name amicably put in suspended animation so neither party could use it once the registration period expired after 5 months remaining on it. Strangely the panel decision fails to records that IAC offered mutual settlement on these lines in good faith to the Complainant in accordance with policy and to save the Panelist fees. The rejection of the offer and subsequent utterly biased decision in favor of Complainant generated a vendetta between the contestants which continues to this day. Subsequently, at IAC's urging the Govt of India has formally revoked the safe harbor intermediary immunity of WIKIMEDIA in India, Any Wikimedia foreign employee entering India and spotted by IAC or our affiliates will be rounded up and disciplined thoroughly before been handed to local law enforcement for anti-national activities affecting the unity and integrity of India, punishable with up to life imprisonment. Several of Wikimedia India's local users have been well "disciplined" by IAC cadres. The main website of Wikimedia's local chapter was disabled on IAC complaint for redistributing child pornography hosted from Wikimedia's US server. On IAC''s complaint the Registration of 2 Wikimedia affiliated NGOs in India to receive foreign currency payments from Wikimedia has been cancelled. So it is for Complainants like Wikimedia to see if the domain name they grabbed was worth it for them. To illustrate the anger of India's Hindus at the UDRP decision against them, I can share that an IAC affiliate intended to eliminate the panelist in his own country for being an enemy to the Hindu nation but fortunately the motion did not gather the needed council votes.

2. QUERY 2: IAC says the present UDRP is grossly biased in favor of trademark holders. The domain name holders are subjected to RDNH akin to the Jews of Europe being eliminated in Auschwitz gas chambers. IAC demands a DENAZIFICATION of ICANN and the UDRP along with its NAZI collaborators like WIPO. It seems WIPO selects their panelist for their stupidity and for strict obedience to follow WIPO's self created gas chamber operation rules. It is no coincidence that WIPO is located in Switzerland where the bulk of the Nazi Gold was stored. IAC shall list out a few of WIPO's tricks to RDNH IAC's domain.

a) The Complaint was allowed to select his choice of 1 of the 2 mutual jurisdictions, when the UDRP rule 3(xii) only requires the Statement " that Complainant will submit, with respect to any challenges to a decision in the administrative proceeding canceling or transferring the domain name, to the jurisdiction of the courts in at least one specified Mutual Jurisdiction;". It is the view of the IAC that the term "specified" as used here refers to the jurisdctions *previously* specified in the definition. It is not open to the Complainant (who is a stranger to the Registrant) to "select " or prevent the Registrant from bringing an RDNH suit in his home jurisdiction. This logic is buttressed by the definition of mutual jurisdiction in UDRP which specifically allows for the waiving of the Registrar's base jurisdiction but never that of the Registrant's. Any other interpretation would render the entire UDRP as invalid under international and national law at the threshold, ie. void ab-initio. The domain registrants are fully protected under theirconsumer protection laws and e-commerce laws. Unlike the USA, in India the laws are against adhesive and standard form contracts. IAC advises ICANN to refresh their memory about the Decision of Delhi High Court in "Mr. Arun Jaitley vs Network Solutions Private ... on 4 July, 2011" in CS(OS) 1745/2009 where ICANN was a party and entered appearance and where ICANN's conniving Registrars and Agents were massively penalised. No wonder ICANN and their registrars and WIPO's wish to avoid Indian Courts at any cost.

b) IAC exposed that the Complainant WIKIMEDIA had submitted 7 forged Trademarks along with his complaint, these forged trademarks were provided by WIPO who was also the UDRP service provider. Yet WIPO's panelist never dismissed the Complaint there and then. Why not ?? is the big question. He never recorded IAC's objections on these and numerous other points. He was biased from start to finish It was for this sole reason that a faction of an IAC' affiliate proposed, at one stage,to assassinate the Panelist for the data loss eventually caused to them. Throughout the proceedings the Panelist allowed WIKIMEDIA's law firm to dump massive compilations of pleadings upon pleadings daily for IAC to respond to, knowing that they were a top 5 US law firm Jones Day whereas IAC was a self represented volunteer social organization. This is sheer harassment of the Registrant but IAC easily coped with these NAZI tactics. A particularly NAZI tactic of WIPOS panelist was to disallow the usage of Hindi (the third most widely spoken language globally) in proceedings only so that Jones Day could execute their harassment tactics in English. The usage of English conclusively shows that UDRP is a Western capitalist tool and so inherently unfair. As the ADO.COM case has graphically shown it is impossible for even the most honest, good faith and efficient expert to prevail against a corrupt and thoroughly dishonest UDRP provider like WIPO. WIPO and the other one (?) are the Auschwitz and Belsen gas chambers respectively of choice for all the NAZI RDNH scamsters on the planet.

c) IAC and the Registrar were served the transfer decision about 6 days after its date. Within 5 days thereafter IAC served a copy of the complete filing with court stamp for IAC's RDNH suit for damages etc in the highest CyberCrimes Court of India at the Registrant's city, on the Registrar, on WIPO, on ICANN, expecting that the transfer would stop. Strangely, WIPO misdirected the Registrar that the 10 days (and not even 10 "business " days) from the date on the order had expired so the transfer must happen notwithstanding the IAC's court case being filed. So desperate was WIPO and WIKIMEDIA not to submit to the court's of India, the penalty for RDNH being set in Indian law as up to about $600,000. After 18 days of communications flying about in the matter ultimately IACNN crumbled to WIKIMEDIA's legal threats to sue ICANN in their common home state of California and transferred the domain to WIKIMEDIA. Since then nobody from WIKIMEDIA USA has ever set foot in India publicly for they will either be arrested by the Indian law enforcement or eliminated by IAC's friends and well wishers.

Refotms in UDRP

1. IAC asks that UDRP and URS both be scrapped. These policies do not address the real problem but only benefit a certain section of affluent stakeholders to the detriment of others. It is far better that these matters be resolved in courts.

2. The issues of mutual jurisdiction must be resolved so that under no circumstances can the domain registrant be unseated from filing in his own jurisdiction to prevent the transfer out of his domain name. It will create a piquant situation for ICAAN if courts in India and the USA give cross orders with each refusing to recognising the other,.

3. Languages like Hindi and Bengali must always be allowed in UDRP proceedings.

4. ICANN must make it compulsory for Registrars to allow Registrants to opt-out from submitting to the Registrar's jurisdiction for third party initiated domain disputes. As someone has asked why should Hindus have to submit to Islamic law for a registrar like CRAZY Domains?

5. Non commercial free speech must be sacrosant

Summary of Submission

IAC says the present UDRP is grossly biased in favor of trademark holders. The domain name holders are subjected to RDNH akin to the Jews of Europe being eliminated in Auschwitz gas chambers. IAC demands a DENAZIFICATION of ICANN and the UDRP along with its NAZI collaborators like WIPO. It seems WIPO selects their panelists for their stupidity and for strict obedience to follow WIPO's self created gas chamber operation rules. It is no coincidence that WIPO is located in Switzerland where the bulk of the Nazi Gold was stored. IAC shall list out a few of WIPO's tricks to RDNH IAC's domain.

IAC exposed that the Complainant WIKIMEDIA had submitted 7 forged Trademarks along with his complaint, these forged trademarks were provided by WIPO who was also the UDRP service provider. Yet WIPO's panelist never dismissed the Complaint there and then. Why not ?? is the big question. He never recorded IAC's objections on these and numerous other points. He was biased from start to finish It was for this sole reason that a faction of an IAC' affiliate proposed, at one stage,to assassinate the Panelist for the data loss eventually caused to them

Refotms in UDRP

1. IAC asks that UDRP and URS both be scrapped. These policies do not address the real problem but only benefit a certain section of affluent stakeholders to the detriment of others. It is far better that these matters be resolved in courts

2. The issues of mutual jurisdiction must be resolved so that under no circumstances can the domain registrant be unseated from filing in his own jurisdiction to prevent the transfer out of his domain name. It will create a piquant situation for ICAAN if courts in India and the USA give cross orders with each refusing to recognising the other

3. Languages like Hindi and Bengali must always be allowed in UDRP proceedings

4. ICANN must make it compulsory for Registrars to allow Registrants to opt-out from submitting to the Registrar's jurisdiction for third party initiated domain disputes.