Registrars will be required to lock domain names prior to registrant finding out about UDRP case.
ICANN has announced a July 31, 2015 implementation date for amended rules under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP).
The new rules were designed to thwart a practice of “cyberflight”, in which the owner of a domain name subject to a UDRP transfers the domain to another registrar to evade the policy.
Under the amended rules, registrars will have to place a defined lock on a domain name within two business days of receiving notice of a UDRP action — and before notifying the domain owner of the UDRP. Complainants no longer have to send a copy of their complaint to respondents as well, as this would tip them off and give them a chance to transfer their domain name.
If a registrar wants to remove whois privacy/proxy services, they need to do so before during the two day period.
The ICANN Board adopted the GNSO Council Policy Recommendations on the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings in September 2013.
Mike says
Ah, I had a feeling they would start making changes to the UDRP rules/policy as they seek to tighten the noose on anyone who has the audacity to fight back against a UDRP. I don’t think this will be the last change coming in next few years.
As for “fleeing jurisidction” ,they accused myself of that, but that is wrong since I had planned a move to another Registrar who happened to be in a jurisdiction where people owning domain names are viewed as being in a proper business (unless they are clearly violating TM rights by commercial use in that specific jurisdiction. I would like to point everyone to how very very important the jurisdiction of your Registrar and YOUR Registration details (Whois record that can be supported !!) .Infact ICANN is clearly making this clear to us all but this change, otherwise they would have said “Fleeing Registrar” not “fleeing jurisdiction” . You see ICANN knows they cannot control the laws in each Country and thus want to tie the majority into less than accomodating jurisdictions.
Mike says
Sorry for the typos I just hate those ,but sure you know what I meant.
David says
When you say “jurisdiction” do you possibly mean the Cayman Islands? What are the legal advantages or benefits of that jurisdiction (or other foreign registrars) vs the US?
Mike says
@David From what I info I have gleaned so far I would say that Germany comes up as number 1 so far, unless anyone knows better ?. Apparently it is against German Law to transfer a domain, and at worst they would order deletion of the domain but then only if you used it commercially in violation of TM valid in Germany. Would be great to hear from anyone can support this “theory” or a better jurisidiction. I am not sure but I think they have sone away with what they used to call the “italian torpedo” which involved lengthy delays and delays and more delays and can imagine complanant pulling hair out by then.
Andrew Allemann says
Sorry guys, but all registrars are required to follow through with UDRP decisions. Otherwise, they can lose their accreditation. The only difference jurisdiction has is disputing decisions in court afterward.
jennifer says
It seems ICAN”T is turning into a power hungry monopoly resembling
more and more the U.S. government.
With each and every move, they seem to be intentionally burying the
very industry that provides the need for their existence, all to cater to
a few rich folks, with deeper pockets and a few trademarks buried
somewhere in their corporate wealth.
If trademark holders are so wanting our domains so badly why don’t
they just get smart and register them and actually PAY FOR THEM?
not only is the above idea smarter, but also would save everyone
alot of money and hassle.
Maybe ppl should just stop buying domains alltogether and find a
new profession where the word ICAN”T is meaningless even better
yet.
First it was the tracking of our IP address’s via the new anual
“confirmation” validation email rules, and now it’s more restrictions
on the register’s to do the bidding further for trademark holders.
Maybe next ICANT will lower the fee to file for UDRP to less than the
actual cost of registration?