This poll is intended to allow the Working Group co-chairs to assess the level of preliminary consensus amongst members for each of the three options under discussion, including an arbitration option and the possibility of limited judicial proceedings, in the situation where an IGO has successfully claimed jurisdictional immunity upon a registrant's filing of a court proceeding following a UDRP or URS panel decision in the IGO's favor.

Please be sure to read all three options before filling out the poll. For each question, an Additional Comments box has been provided as well.

The current working text for each option has been included in the applicable question; however, note that the final text and certain details have not yet been fully agreed. See the full Options Proposal for details.

This poll does not replace the formal consensus call required under the GNSO's Working Group Guidelines that will take place following ICANN60 in respect of all the proposed final recommendations. However, your participation in this poll is important to ensure that the sense of the Working Group on each of these options is portrayed accurately to the community at ICANN60. Thank you.

Question Title

* 1. Please indicate if you support or do not support Option A, described as follows:
"Where a losing registrant challenges the initial UDRP/URS decision by filing suit in a national court of mutual jurisdiction and the IGO that succeeded in its initial UDRP/URS complaint also succeeds in asserting jurisdictional immunity in that court, the decision rendered against the registrant in the predecessor UDRP or URS shall be vitiated (i.e. set aside."

Question Title

* 2. Please indicate if you support or do not support Option B, described as follows:
"In relation to domain names with a CREATION DATE before the (Policy Effective Date), then Option A applies. In relation to domain names with a CREATION DATE on or after the (Policy Effective Date), Option C shall apply. After five (5) years or 10 instances of Option C being utilized, whichever occurs first, ICANN and the various dispute resolution providers (including any who have administered arbitration proceedings under the new Option C) will conduct a review to determine the impact, both positive and negative, as a result of “trying out” Option C."

Note: The Working Group has not agreed on whether the decisive date should be the Policy Effective Date or some other date.

Question Title

* 3. Please indicate if you support or do not support Option C, described as follows:
"Where a complainant IGO succeeds in a UDRP/URS proceeding, the losing registrant proceeds to file suit in a court of mutual jurisdiction, and the IGO subsequently succeeds in asserting jurisdictional immunity, the registrant shall have the option to transfer the dispute to an arbitration forum meeting certain pre-established criteria for determination under the national law that the original appeal was based upon, with such action limited to deciding the ownership of the domain name.

The respondent shall be given 10 days (or a longer period of time if able to cite a national statute or procedure that grants a period longer than 10 days) to either: (1) inform the UDRP/URS provider [and the registrar] that it intends to seek arbitration under this limited mechanism; or (2) request that the UDRP/URS decision continue to be stayed, as the respondent has filed, or intends to file, a judicial appeal against the IGO’s successful assertion of immunity.

An IGO which files a complaint under the UDRP/URS shall be required to agree to this limited arbitration mechanism when filing the complaint. If, subsequently. it refuses to participate in the arbitration, the enforcement of the underlying UDRP/URS decision will be permanently stayed.

The parties shall have the option to mutually agree to limit the original judicial proceedings to solely determining the ownership of the domain name. Subject to agreement by the registrant concerned, the parties shall also be free to utilize the limited arbitration mechanism described above at any time prior to the registrant filing suit in a court of mutual jurisdiction.

In agreeing to utilize the limited arbitration mechanism, both the complainant and respondent are required to inform ICANN."

Note: You can review all the specific elements that are being proposed for arbitration in the latest Options Proposal.

Question Title

* 4. Please provide your name before you exit this survey. Thank you!

T