DRS Review

[foz]

Scope of the current review.

http://www.nominet.uk/resources/pol...-dispute-resolution-service-policy-procedure/

We believe that the drs is continuing to be successful in meeting these core aims. In addition, the drs enjoys a significant level of support amongst our stakeholders in the domain name industry, government and the intellectual property community. We have therefore not sought to undertake a fundamental review of our drs policy but have instead looked to identify any areas where our policy and procedure were not as clear or up-to-date as they could be.

The proposed changes are intended to address these issues by consolidating the current separate policy and procedure documents into a new single policy document.

All changes proposed to the text are clearly identified in the supporting documents and include:

General updating to reflect the removal of fax numbers, availability of registrations directly at the second level within .uk;
removal of the option to file hard copy documents with us;
ability of nominet to reject complaints which appear to be vexatious; and
keeping the fees separate from the policy text.

please give your views by 5pm on thursday 24 march 2016

I spend £10,000's in legal fees per year on UK disputes defending my domains. Would like to get some of that back (at the Experts discretion).

Have requested a similar inclusion to what is offered in .ca;

4.6 Bad Faith of Complainant. If the Registrant is successful, and the Registrant
proves, on a balance of probabilities, that the Complaint was commenced by the
Complainant for the purpose of attempting, unfairly and without colour of right, to cancel
or obtain a transfer of any Registration which is the subject of the Proceeding, then the
Panel may order the Complainant to pay to the Provider in trust for the Registrant an
amount of up to five thousand dollars ($5,000) to defray the costs incurred by the
Registrant in preparing for, and filing material in the Proceeding. The Complainant will
be ineligible to file another Complaint in respect of any Registration with any Provider
until the amount owing is paid in full to the Provider.

https://cira.ca/sites/default/files/attachment/policies/cdrppolicy_-_en.pdf

 

[monaghan]

I think it's only fair that Nominet are able to protect the registrant through the DRS, yet still enabling a genuine DRS to remain affordable.

 

[Edwin]

I like your suggestion to impose some kind of financial penalty on frivolous DRS chancers. It redresses the balance of power a tiny bit - at the moment, entirely innocent registrants are potentially subject to unnecessary costs any time somebody feels like "having a go" at taking one of their domains...

 

[bluerock]

I have a current drs and the basis of the complaint is they didnt get renewal notices etc and "the registrant has our domain".
It pisses me off that complaints like this get through. No matter what the basis of the complaint is the registrant still has to spend time/money compiling the response.

I agree with Foz that there should be some recompense to registrants who receive nuisance drs'.

 

[Paullas]

I have a current drs and the basis of the complaint is they didnt get renewal notices etc and "the registrant has our domain".

It pisses me off that complaints like this get through. No matter what the basis of the complaint is the registrant still has to spend time/money compiling the response.



I agree with Foz that there should be some recompense to registrants who receive nuisance drs'.

I have exactly the sames DRS issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[monaghan]

I have a current drs and the basis of the complaint is they didnt get renewal notices etc and "the registrant has our domain".
It pisses me off that complaints like this get through.

If that is the only claim in the DRS, can you not complain to Nominet? After all, they do accept trading of domain names as a valid activity

 

[Edwin]

Would anyone prefer to adopt the UDRP out of interest?

No definitely not. They seem to get it wrong about generics far more often than the DRS does!

 

[tifosi]

One of my main complaints at the last DRS review was that there was NO entry checking. The complainant paid their money and took their chance.

There was IMO a clear need for this. I suggested a basic expert panel to check that each DRS 'application' passed a basic requirements test to weed out frivolous and I some cases malicious applications. Only once this was done would a DRS be accepted and the respondent notified. A DRS application charge should be levied to pay for this.

As it is they just check you have filled in the forms correctly. Simply not good enough.

S

 

[Rob_F]

Would anyone prefer to adopt the UDRP out of interest?

Absolutely not.

- Rob

 

[bluerock]

If that is the only claim in the DRS, can you not complain to Nominet? After all, they do accept trading of domain names as a valid activity

Its not worth it as Nom have already accepted the complaint. Today was deadline day for my submission so a short and sweet one went in. Now lets see if they pay the £750 + vat.

 

[foz]

Case in point, my latest complaint.

What rights are you asserting?
My surname is XXXXX and I have a greater right to use my surname as part of my online and trading identity than the current domain squatter who has no link to the name whatsoever. I also believe it to be the case that my residence in the United Kingdom gives me a greater right to the .co.uk domain name over the squatter who is based in New Zealand. His ownership of the domain is even preventing me from registering a .uk domain.

This crap is approved by Nominet as a complaint. :x

Just some dumb ass with a huge chip on his shoulder, that's all.

 

[Edwin]

Case in point, my latest complaint.



This crap is approved by Nominet as a complaint. :x

Just some dumb ass with a huge chip on his shoulder, that's all.

Ouch. You're right that it's a pain. Still, isn't it possible (if you get a lot of those) to have a template Response that covers all the basics of "This is generic... You don't have an automatic right to... etc." and then just cut and paste it against every DRS challenge you receive of that nature? So it's still "work" but without any expense or time requirement?

 

[foz]

Ouch. You're right that it's a pain. Still, isn't it possible (if you get a lot of those) to have a template Response that covers all the basics of "This is generic... You don't have an automatic right to... etc." and then just cut and paste it against every DRS challenge you receive of that nature? So it's still "work" but without any expense or time requirement?

It's still work and in my mind is an abuse of the DRS process. This is not a genuine grievance in the slightest. I want it, toddler behavior.

From the same individual to the broker;

I would rather spend the money taking legal action against the domain name holder. I have been in touch with my lawyer and also taken advice from various other specialists including ICANN, who say that I have a pretty strong case to claim my domain and sue for damages.

Bluff and lies. He is in IT, so no surprises by the attitude.

 

[bluerock]

I always laugh my socks off when people say "I'll take my complaint against you it ICANN".

 

[monaghan]

Ouch. You're right that it's a pain. Still, isn't it possible (if you get a lot of those) to have a template Response that covers all the basics of "This is generic... You don't have an automatic right to... etc." and then just cut and paste it against every DRS challenge you receive of that nature? So it's still "work" but without any expense or time requirement?

Surely Nominet should be validating whether the current owner is in breach of any registration conditions and rejecting the DRS if all is above board, isn't this the logical thing to be doing in order to protect the registrant and stop wasting everybody's time all round. Yes of course there needs to be mechanism to deal with the hardened domain abusers, but there needs to be some protection for those not breaking any rules and perhaps a paid option for those who insist in making a claim where no rules have been broken.

 

[martin-s]

Surely Nominet should be validating whether the current owner is in breach of any registration conditions and rejecting the DRS.

Isn't the whole point of DRS to hand decision making to an informed and independent expert?

I'm with Edwin. Have boilerplates on standby and suck it up as a cost of doing business.

 

[RobM]

Its not worth it as Nom have already accepted the complaint. Today was deadline day for my submission so a short and sweet one went in. Now lets see if they pay the £750 + vat.

Nominet will be hoping he does. Hmmm makes me wonder how frivolous complaints get through.

 

[foz]

Nominet will be hoping he does. Hmmm makes me wonder how frivolous complaints get through.

The Expert gets all that fee. Has been at that level for years, inflation adjusted it should be up to £1,000 by now.

 

[humble pie]

Based on that, its in the interest of the *experts* to keep the drs flood gates open then.. money for old rope.

The Expert gets all that fee.

 

[RobM]

The Expert gets all that fee. Has been at that level for years, inflation adjusted it should be up to £1,000 by now.

Or it was just overpriced and mostly unnecessary when first introduced?