Re: Dispute resolution

[John Leslie <john@jlc.net>]

Karl Denninger wrote:
> (quoting John Leslie:)
> 
>>    The draft recognizes that gTLDs are inter-national by their nature,
>> and that arbitration should be preferred to litigation. Why can't we
>> be consistent here?
> 
> Because you can't usurp the rights of individuals and firms.

   Karl seems to have a different view of "rights". Read on...

>> (Yes, I know we can't prevent someone who never agreed to arbitration
>> from filing suit for trademark infringement in any court with jurisdiction
>> over assets of the registrant; but we needn't make his/her job easier,

   I frankly don't understand what "right" Karl thinks I'm usurping. I'm
explicitly saying that he _can_ file suit in a U.S. court against a person
with assets in the U.S.

>> and hopefully we can establish a precedent of quickly dismissing suits by
>> persons who want to take SLDs for their own use.)
>> 
> This is an unconstitutional requirement (see the 5th amendment in the US).

   I guess I need to remind Karl that "inter-national" _means_ involving
more than one nation. Karl seems to have a great attachment to U.S. courts,
but people who live in other nations will not share it.

> Binding arbitration is an OPTION for two individuals who enter into a
> contract to assume.  In a free market, some offerors of service will
> insist on this. 

   I quite agree.

> If *ALL* of them, or a significant market force, do, then you are likely
> in violation of the Bill of Rights -- at least in the United States.

   But we're not "in" the United States here -- we're dealing with
inter-national issues.

> Firms have a *right* to pursue legal redress for violations of their
> rights in this country through the courts.  Its not an *option* -- its
> a RIGHT.

   Not everyone agrees that "firms" have "rights", Karl -- although
individuals certainly have rights.

   Furthermore, many kinds of disputes may _not_ be pursued in U.S.
courts.

   The IAHC is charged with defining a process for new gTLDs. IMHO,
that should include a process for dispute resolution. The IAHC _cannot_
refer inter-national disputes to U.S. courts, no matter how much Karl
whines about it.

--
John Leslie <john@jlc.net>