ICANN envisioned the URS (Uniform Rapid Suspension) procedures as a less-expensive and quicker alternative to the well-established UDRP. But the URS has been criticized by trademark owners as well as domain name registrants alike. As adopted by ICANN, It is intended for use only in “clear cases of trademark abuse” with no “open questions of fact.”
Of course, that remains to be seen. I have wondered who would be drawing the line to determine whether a particular case is a clear case of Trademark abuse. What standards have been set to make that determination?
More than three months after acknowledging challenges to the proposed URS, ICANN recently announced two important steps toward implementing the new dispute procedure
ICANN has issued a Request for Information (“RFI”) from potential URS service providers. Notably, neither WIPO nor NAF, nor any other arbitration service, for that matter — has publicly indicated interest in providing URS services.
The RFI is intended “to solicit responses from bidders and gather feedback that may be used to select one or more URS providers, or inform the development of a comprehensive RFP [Request for Proposal].”
The RFI states that “projected URS providers” will be published by February 28, 2013. ICANN has committed to having the URS in place before any of the new top-level domains are delegated (presumably sometime late next year), so the clock on URS implementation is beginning to tick more loudly.
Thanks in part to Doug Isenberg, and
Thanks for “listening”
The Neu Facebook