Thread: UDRP to go Paperless?

WIPO Proposal for Paperless UDRP

Interesting article on CircleID that talks about WIPO's proposal to ICANN about paperless UDRP:

Basically, the proposal involves submissions being made in electronic form, and that instead of delivery of the actual complaint, that notice of the complaint be delivered instead. This would save considerable amounts of paper, reduce courier charges (as the notice weighs far less than the full complaint), and thus would be good for the environment.

CircleID suggests that to ensure domain owners have actual notice of an UDRP action, they optionally store at their registrar the name and contact information of their legal counsel, who would then also receive copies of the UDRP notice. I think this would work for big companies. However, many smaller companies and/or domain owners won't have have legal counsel to list.

I think in this technology-driven age, paperless UDRP makes more sense. Filing paper documents seems so old-fashioned!

Currently, India still has a way to go by way of internet penetration, but I wonder if the INRegistry/INDRP will eventually follow suit if UDRP does go paperless.

Do you think paperless is the way to go?

I have to agree that going paperless makes a lot of sense for Uniform Domain Resolution Policy proceedings. Everyone is already filing electronically. Eliminating the paper filing would remove much of the hassle in putting these proceedings in play in responding to them as well.

While an initial trademark registration is not an adversarial process, all the trademark trial and appeal board proceedings are adversarial. Everything at the TTAB and trademark registration process allow for electronic filing.

I do not think that designating an attorney at the outset of registration makes much sense. Most domain name owners aren't thinking that they are going to need one in the first instance. To me, it would be a red flag that someone is cybersquatting.

Thanks Enrico!

Originally Posted by EnricoSchaefer

I do not think that designating an attorney at the outset of registration makes much sense. Most domain name owners aren't thinking that they are going to need one in the first instance. To me, it would be a red flag that someone is cybersquatting.

That's true Enrico, most domainers aren't thinking about potential lawsuits when they register a domain. That's why I think only the major companies would be willing to do this, as they are likely used to listing who their legal counsel is.