ALAC members have had some discussion on the staff manager's issues report on UDRP review. There is no clear consensus on the ALAC about what issues would be our "top five." Committee members were concerned about questions of transparency and accountability regarding UDRP decisions (issues 1, 2, 4, 5 are relevant to this); about internal appelate review and precedential effect (10, 19); and in particular about affirmative defenses (18), the interpretation of "holding vs. use" (15), and the interpretation of "confusing similarity" (13). It was observed that a centralized database of UDRP decisions (issue 1) would have most value if there is enforceable precedential value to earlier decisions. Issues 4 and 5 were considered to be so closely related that they should probably be dealt with together. There was also some criticism that the list of issues contained in the staff manager's report was not helpful for reaching any consensus on priorities: The issues differed widely in scope, some reaching to the core of the policy (definition of "confusing similarity" and holding vs. "use") or its operation (precedential value), others having a more limited nature (should decisions be put in a central repository, should complaints and responses be published, should providers be accredited). -- Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org> At-Large Advisory Committee: http://alac.info/