RE: [nc-udrp] UDRP Questionnaire

["Katrina Burchell" <Katrina.Burchell@unilever.com>]

{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl {\f0\fmodern\fcharset0 Courier New;}{\f1\fswiss\fprq2 Arial;}}
{\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;}
\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\ulnone\f0\fs20\par
\par
Dear task force colleagues\par
\par
although I am on the task force to represent the complainant, I tried to think of some ways in which we can publicise the questionnaire to others who might have a different point of view.  I think that many complainants and their representatives will complete the questionnaire and since there are more organised groups in the field of trade marks it is relatively simple to get the message out.  However that will mean that the answers we receive are biased and not representing other interests.\par
\par
these are some ideas I came up with - does anyone have any contacts where we can try and get in touch with the right people?\par
\par
the press - either the general press or the internet or IT specialist press\par
search engines - can we get the questionnaire on some search engines or banners?\par
CENTR - I came across this organisation via my .eu involvement but can't recall the lady's name I met there - I have forwarded the link onto the dot eu discussion site anyway.\par
ISPA - can they help?\par
\par
Nominet (the UK NIC) are helping me get in touch with a couple of UK based organisations which have contacts with consumers associations and other interested parties because they have experience of trying to poll opinion when they introduced their new dispute resolution policy.\par
\par
Interestingly, the first decision under this new procedure has been issued and is on their site at \ul http://www.nic.uk/drs/decisions/lilly-v-clayton.html\ulnone   .  It goes in favour of the trade mark owner (so some of you may be annoyed!) but the facts really speak for themselves and the respondent didn't submit any evidence.\par
\par
regards\par
Katrina\par
\par
\par
Trade Mark Counsel\par
Unilever\par
\par
\pard\li360\cf0\protect\f1\fs16 -----Original Message-----\par
\protect0\pard\protect\fi-1440\li1800\tx1440\b From:\tab\b0 Chicoine, Caroline G. [SMTP:CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com]\par
\b Sent:\tab\b0 15 November 2001 17:11\par
\b To:\tab\b0 'council@dnso.org'\par
\b Cc:\tab\b0 'nc-udrp@dnso.org'\par
\b Subject:\tab\b0 FW: [nc-udrp] UDRP Questionnaire\par
\protect0\pard\protect\li360\f0\fs20\par
We have received a request to see if the registrars and/or registries would\par
be willing to include a link or reference to the UDRP Review questionnaire\par
on their websites.  I am simply passing this on to the council and in\par
particulr the Registry and Registrar constituencies to the extent they can\par
help us.\par
\par
-----Original Message-----\par
From: J. Scott Evans [\cf1\ul mailto:jse@adamspat.com\cf0\ulnone ] \par
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 2:27 PM\par
To: John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D.; nc-udrp@dnso.org\par
Subject: Re: [nc-udrp] UDRP Questionnaire\par
\par
\par
I am not so sure that the providers could provide the URL through some\par
automatic mechanism for fear of running afoul of spam provisions and privacy\par
provisions that differ from country to country.  That being said, I think\par
groups like ICANNWATCH.ORG and ICANNBLOG.ORG could get the message out to\par
some interested parties.  I also think that the providers could post a\par
message and the URL on their home pages.  Lastly, we might ask the\par
registrars and registries to assist us by positing the URL on their sites\par
and sending the URL to parties who receive their electronic updates.\par
\par
Those are about all the suggestions I have.  If anyone is connected to the\par
press, give them a call.\par
\par
J. Scott\par
----- Original Message -----\par
From: John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. <john@johnberryhill.com>\par
To: <nc-udrp@dnso.org>\par
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:05 PM\par
Subject: Re: [nc-udrp] UDRP Questionnaire\par
\par
\par
>\par
> While trademark owners can be reached through organizations such as INTA\par
and\par
> so forth, there are no corresponding organizations of domain name\par
registrants\par
> or UDRP respondents (not all of whom, of course, are non-trademark\par
owners).\par
>\par
> I am wondering, since the UDRP providers have email addresses for all of\par
the\par
> UDRP respondents, whether it would be possible to send respondents notice\par
of\par
> the survey, in much the same way that attorneys who have ever filed a UDRP\par
> complaint (myself included) receive various "updates", informative\par
notices,\par
> and even color brochures, from the UDRP providers.  I gather that similar\par
> mass mailings are not sent to respondents, but see no reason why\par
respondents\par
> cannot be informed of the survey in this manner.\par
>\par
> That would certainly be an easy thing to include in notifications relating\par
to\par
> disputes presently pending, or for which notice of commencement or of\par
> decision is to be sent to respondents within the near future.  Sort of an\par
"if\par
> you've enjoyed being confused by people you've never heard of, being put\par
off\par
> by a string of lawyers who had no idea what you were talking about before\par
you\par
> eventually found one who did, scheduling time to consult with that lawyer\par
who\par
> *might* return your phone calls, trying to gather evidence refuting a\par
common\par
> law trademark claim, justifying your existence, explaining you are not a\par
> thief, and jumping through all our procedural hoops on 20 days notice,\par
then\par
> let us know at [URL]".  Although I'm sure that others could word the\par
> notification more diplomatically than I would.\par
>\par
> John\par
>\par
>\par
>\par
>\par
\par
}