JJ sends over this post concerning some troubling evidence that folks from the National Arbitration Forum, who are involved in domain name disputes, have been doing an awful lot of cutting and pasting from earlier decisions
in creating their new decisions, leading to nonsense text being included in the decisions, and raising some questions about the outcomes of certain rulings. For example, the article discusses how the company Woot won a domain dispute for the domain name wooot.com, and the domain was supposed to have been transferred to Woot. Instead, the domain was canceled, and some of the text of the decision talked about AOL and a totally unrelated domain name iaol.com.
In an era of cut & paste simplicity, perhaps this isn't too surprising, but when you go to the trouble of going through an arbitration hearing, you would at least like to think that the decision has been considered carefully -- not sloppily cut and pasted from earlier decisions with apparently little or no review.