Uniform Rapid Suspension: Difference between revisions
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
Around the time of [[ICANN 45]] it had become apparent that the URS would not be implemented for the goal price point of $300 to $500, which is a fifth to a third the cost of a [[UDRP]]. The [[UDRP]] providers [[WIPO]] and [[National Arbitration Forum]] said they could not implement it for these prices, with WIPO stating it could possibly meet the goal if unresponsive defendants automatically lost their cases. This worried some in the [[GNSO]] about the possibility of fewer registrant rights under the URS, and they encouraged an open Request for Information bidding process. In November, 2012, [[ICANN]]'s [[Olof Nordling]] signaled that he had received several bids that they were reviewing and he was no longer of the belief that the URS could not be implemented within its goal price points.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11104-icann-may-have-got-lucky-with-a-urs-vendor ICANN may Have Got Lucky with a URS Vendor, DomainIncite.com]</ref> | Around the time of [[ICANN 45]] it had become apparent that the URS would not be implemented for the goal price point of $300 to $500, which is a fifth to a third the cost of a [[UDRP]]. The [[UDRP]] providers [[WIPO]] and [[National Arbitration Forum]] said they could not implement it for these prices, with WIPO stating it could possibly meet the goal if unresponsive defendants automatically lost their cases. This worried some in the [[GNSO]] about the possibility of fewer registrant rights under the URS, and they encouraged an open Request for Information bidding process. In November, 2012, [[ICANN]]'s [[Olof Nordling]] signaled that he had received several bids that they were reviewing and he was no longer of the belief that the URS could not be implemented within its goal price points.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11104-icann-may-have-got-lucky-with-a-urs-vendor ICANN may Have Got Lucky with a URS Vendor, DomainIncite.com]</ref> | ||
The first URS Provider, The National Arbitration Forum (FORUM) was announced in February 2013. ICANN described its application proposal as "stunning", and noted their "proven track record boasting resolution of over 19,000 claims in 12+ years of administering UDRP cases. Additionally, FORUM has already developed, and is currently operating a TLD-specific rapid relief system."<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-20feb13-en.htm Announcement, ICANN.org] Retrieved 21 Feb 2103</ref> | |||
== Difference between URS and UDRP == | == Difference between URS and UDRP == | ||