February 19, 2008

Liability of an approved provider for UDRP?

The very knowledgeable John Berryhill filed a complaint before the Minnesota Attorney General. Minnesota is the US state where the National Arbitration Forum is located.
Apparently, the NAF did not refund fees after a UDRP proceeding was withdrawn, pursuant to article 9(e) of NAF Supplemental Rules which states that "[i]n cases where the Respondent requested a three-member Panel and the Complaint is withdrawn prior to the appointment of a Panel, the Respondent will be reimbursed $1,000 of its fee.”

Why is this interesting? Because a complainant who files a UDRP complaint agrees not to sue the arbitration center for wrongdoing (before the NAF, the "Complainant agrees that its claims and remedies concerning the registration of the domain name, the dispute, or the dispute’s resolution shall be solely against the domain-name holder and waives all such claims and remedies against (a) the National Arbitration Forum and panelists, except in the case of deliberate wrongdoing, (b) the registrar, (c) the registry administrator, and (d) the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, as well as their directors, officers, employees, and agents")... but not a respondent! This could be the first case ever where a UDRP provider could be fined for not complying with the proceeding rules.

No comments: