Are Domain Disputes Suffering From Arbitrators Arbitrarily Cutting & Pasting Decisions?

from the that-doesn't-sound-good dept

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, 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

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.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    RobShaver, 7 May 2010 @ 7:44am

    Lowest Bidder

    That's the risk you take when you let contracts to the lowest bidder, don't you think? Thank God it's not government regulated. Then you get the same incompetence but it costs a lot more.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.