> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, at 12:41 [=GMT+0800], Horacio T. Cadiz wrote:
> >   Because they can select the arbitrators, they select the
> > arbitrators favorable to them.  Big companies, as a matter of course, will
> > select the WIPO panel.  Because big companies are usually the
> > complainants, the WIPO panel generates a lot of business and the other
> > arbitrators die.  Finally, only one arbitrator will be alive. Guess who
> > that will be?

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Marc Schneiders wrote:

> I think we have a better chance if we
> argue on the level of the rules being flawed. Not people being greedy.

  I agree. Let me clarify that my argument is not against people being
greedy.  I just pointed out the consequences of the flawed rule --
allowing complainants to select the arbitrator.

(1) Complainants will select the arbitrator favorable to their cause
(2) Because most complainants are the big IP owners, most of the
complainants will choose the WIPO Panel and the like
(3) The other arbitrators will close down
(4) Only WIPO and other arbitrators sympathetic to IP owners will be left
around
(5) All UDRP cases will be resolved in favor of IP owners



*************************************************************
* Horacio T. Cadiz    | Open Source. No Gates. No Windows.  *
* hcadiz AT ph.net    | It is Open. No Bill. It is Free.    *
*-----------------------------------------------------------*
*       Philippine Network Foundation, Inc (PHNET)          *
*************************************************************