CircleID

The reality is that the UDRP is a faulty Policy with a lot of omissions. Everybody knows that it was initially created to fight the crime of cybersquatting, however the discretionary power afforded to panels and their wide interpretations of the rules and principles have allowed the Policy to take a new direction, far away from its initial purpose. For instance, how can the Policy deal with the issues where there is a domain name registration by a European registrar who is a competitor with a US trademark owner? Why should panels apply the rule of the prior trademark registration? Traditional trademark law allows two identical marks to exist in different geographical spheres. Why should the domain name be taken away from the European registrar, because let's say he has a later trademark registration compared to the US one? It is obvious that there is a gap in the Policy and perhaps competition law should interfere.
If it were to adhere to the Rules of the Policy most of the decisions should never have been enforced and the domain names should never have been taken away from their registrants. Is it about time to activate a checking mechanism for the decisions?