The fact that you have chosen a three member Panel suggests that this is a domain name worth fighting for, so it will probably be of interest to you to know the people who will ultimately be deciding its fate.
A consideration regarding who to nominate is not something that you should shy away from or simply shrug off as a mere formality.
This non-exhaustive list will help you when it comes to selecting a Panelist which will give you the best chance of success and avoid any surprises:
- Choose a Panelist who has found Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH)
Sites such as www.rdnh.com provide valuable information on panelists who have found RDNH over the past five years and the reasons for why they came to those decisions. Using the helpful search bar, it is possible to search a particular Panelist and compare the number of RDNH decisions they have awarded against other panelists’ records.
- Get to know them
Other sites also include www.udrpsearch.com which can help you to research a Panelists’ past decisions. By reading through some of their decisions it will help you get an idea on the level of proof they require or whether they have found in favour of Respondents in similar fact situations.
- Steer clear of controversial decision makers
Keeping up to date with many of the high profile domain blogs such as <TheDomains.com>, <DomainNameWire.com> and <DomainGang.com> will help you to identify panelists who make controversial decisions. These blogs regularly write detailed articles on UDRP decisions and are not afraid to rebuke panelists who make bad decisions. Panelists to avoid are ones who misinterpret the Policy, perhaps only acquiring use in bad faith or panelists who ignore its literal interpretation in favour of how they feel the Policy should be worded.
- Learn from the best
Perhaps you are already familiar with some of the top IP Attorneys, firms or companies which have a high level of success in UDRP defence cases. It may be interesting to find that a lot of the cases involving these legal representatives also feature the same panelists; this is not a coincidence. Once a legal representative has built up a level of confidence in a Panelist’s decision making skills, its very likely they will continue to select them in the knowledge that they will often support their arguments and reasoning.
- Don’t be afraid of your opponent’s selection
It’s important to try and not be too overly concerned with your opponent’s selection unless you have evidence which shows partiality or lack of independence. Even if the nominated Panelist previously found in favour of the Complainant, it’s important to remember that this decision will be based on the merits of the present facts and circumstances which could differ greatly from the previous case. Secondly, there are still two other panelists which could argue in your favour and if you have chosen yours well, you only need to persuade the Presiding Panelist (appointed by the UDRP provider) of the strength of your case.