• Fraud;
• Forgery;
• Phishing;
• Child pornography;
• Malicious software;
• Narcotics;

1.2.6 A box in which the Complainant may submit up to 500 words of explanatory free form text.

1.2.7 An attestation that the Complaint is not being filed on any improper basis and that there is a sufficient good faith basis for filing the Complaint.

1.3 If the Registrant name is not available to the Complainant due to some WHOIS restriction (such as privacy), then the RSCCM Provider shall obtain that information from the registry, to determine the applicability of these rules.

2. Fees

2.1 Fees as set for in the Provider’s fee schedule shall be submitted with the filed Complaint.

2.2 Complaints listing fifteen (15) or more disputed domain names registered by the same registrant will be subject to a Response Fee which will be refundable to the prevailing party. Under no circumstances shall the Response Fee exceed the fee charged to the Complainant.

3. Administrative Review

3.1 Complaints will be subjected to an initial administrative review by the RSSCM Provider for compliance with the filing requirements. This is a review to determine that the Complaint contains all of the necessary information and is not a determination as to whether a prima facie case has been established.

3.2 The Administrative Review shall be conducted within two (2) business days of submission of the

Complaint to the RSSCM Provider.

3.3 Given the rapid nature of this Procedure, and the intended low level of required fees, there will be no opportunity to correct inadequacies in the filing requirements.

3.4 If a Complaint is deemed non-compliant with filing requirements, the Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice to the Complainant filing a new complaint. The initial filing fee shall not be refunded in these circumstances.

4. Notice and Locking of Domain

4.1 Upon completion of the Administrative Review, the RSSCM Provider must immediately notify the Registry Operator (via email) after the Complaint has been deemed compliant with the filing requirements. Registry Operator notice shall include a copy of the Complaint. Within 24 hours of receipt of the Notice of Complaint from the RSSCM Provider, the Registry Operator shall “lock” the domain, meaning the registry shall restrict all changes to the Registrant (domain owner) data, including transfer and deletion of the domain names, but the name will continue to resolve. The Registry Operator will notify the RSSCM Provider immediately upon locking the domain name (“Notice of Lock”).

4.2 Within 24 hours after receiving Notice of Lock from the Registry Operator, the RSSCM Provider shall notify the Registrant of the Complaint (“Notice of Complaint”), sending a hard copy of the Notice of

Complaint to the addresses listed in the Whois contact information, and providing an electronic copy of the Complaint, advising of the locked status, as well as the potential effects if the Registrant fails to respond and defend against the Complaint. Notices must be clear and understandable to Registrants located globally. The Notice of Complaint shall be in English.

4.3 The Notice of Complaint to the Registrant shall be sent through email. The Complaint and accompanying exhibits, if any, shall be served electronically.

4.4 The RSSCM Provider shall also electronically notify the Registrar of record for the domain name at issue via the addresses the registrar has on file with Registry Operator.

5. The Response

5.1 A Registrant will have 14 Calendar Days from the date the RSSCM Provider sent its Notice of Complaint to the Registrant to electronically file a Response with the RSSCM Provider. Upon receipt, the Provider will electronically send a copy of the Response, and accompanying exhibits, if any, to the Complainant.

5.2 Respondent shall pay a Response Fee as set forth in section 2.2 above if the Complaint lists fifteen (15) or more disputed domain names against the same Registrant. In the case of fifteen (15) or more disputed domain names, the Response Fee will be refundable to the prevailing party. No additional filing fee will be charged if the Registrant files its Response prior to being declared in default or not more than thirty (30) Calendar Days following a Default Determination. For Responses filed more than thirty (30) Calendar Days after a Default Determination, regardless of the number of domain names in the Complaint, shall pay a reasonable non-refundable fee set forth in the Provider Supplemental Rules for re-examination

(in addition to any applicable Response Fee required in RSSCM Procedure 2.2).

5.3 Upon request by the Registrant, a limited extension of time to respond may be granted by the RSSCM Provider if there is a good faith basis for doing so and if the request is received during the Response period, after Default, or not more than thirty (30) Calendar Days after Determination. In no event shall the extension be for more than seven (7) Calendar Days.

5.4 The Response shall be no longer than 2,500 words, excluding attachments, and the content of the

Response should include the following:

5.4.1 Confirmation of Registrant data.

5.4.2 Specific admission or denial of each of the grounds upon which the Complaint is based.

5.4.3 Any defense which contradicts the Complainant’s claims.

5.4.4 A statement that the contents are true and accurate.

5.5 In keeping with the intended expedited nature of the RSSCM and the remedy afforded to a successful Complainant, affirmative claims for relief by the Registrant will not be permitted except for an allegation that the Complainant has filed an abusive Complaint.

5.6 Once the Response is filed, and the RSSCM Provider determines that the Response is compliant with the filing requirements of a Response (which shall be on the same day), the Complaint, Response and supporting materials will immediately be sent to a qualified Examiner, selected by the RSSCM Provider, for review and Determination. All materials submitted are considered by the Examiner.

6. Default

6.1 If at the expiration of the 14 Calendar Day Response period (or extended period if granted), the

Registrant does not submit an answer, the Complaint proceeds to Default.

6.2 In either case, the Provider shall provide Notice of Default via email to the Complainant and Registrant, and via mail and fax to Registrant. During the Default period, the Registrant will be prohibited from changing content found on the site to argue that it is now a legitimate use and will also be prohibited from changing the Whois information.

6.3 All Default cases proceed to Examination for review on the merits of the claim.

6.4 If after Examination in Default cases, the Examiner rules in favor of Complainant, Registrant shall have the right to seek relief from Default via de novo review by filing a Response at any time up to six months after the date of the Notice of Default. The Registrant will also be entitled to request an extension of an additional six months if the extension is requested before the expiration of the initial six-month period.

6.5 If a Response is filed after: (i) the Respondent was in Default (so long as the Response is filed in accordance with 6.4 above); and (ii) proper notice is provided in accordance with the notice requirements set forth above, the domain name shall again resolve to the original IP address as soon as practical, but shall remain locked as if the Response had been filed in a timely manner before Default. The filing of a Response after Default is not an appeal; the case is considered as if responded to in a timely manner.

6.5 If after Examination in Default case, the Examiner rules in favor of Registrant, the Provider shall notify the Registry Operator to unlock the name and return full control of the domain name registration to the Registrant.

7. Examiners

7.1 One Examiner selected by the Provider will preside over a RSSCM proceeding.

7.2 Examiners should have demonstrable relevant legal background, such as in criminal law. Specifically, Examiners shall be provided with instructions on the RSSCM elements and defenses and how to conduct the examination of a RSSCM proceeding.

7.3 Examiners used by any given RSSCM Provider shall be rotated to the extent feasible to avoid forum or examiner shopping. RSSCM Providers are strongly encouraged to work equally with all Examiners, with reasonable exceptions (such as language needs, non- performance, or malfeasance) to be determined on a case-by-case analysis.

8. Examination Standards and Burden of Proof

8.1 The standards that the qualified Examiner shall apply when rendering its Determination is whether the domain name or website is being used for the commission, aiding or abetting of serious organized crimes including:

• Fraud;

• Forgery;

• Phishing;

• Child pornography;

• Malicious software;

• Narcotics;

8.2 The burden of proof shall be clear and convincing evidence.

8.3 For a RSSCM matter to conclude in favor of the Complainant, the Examiner shall render a

Determination that there is no genuine issue of material fact.

8.4 If the Examiner finds that the Complainant has not met its burden, or that genuine issues of material fact remain in regard to any of the elements, the Examiner will reject the Complaint under the relief available under the RSSCM. That is, the Complaint shall be dismissed if the Examiner finds that evidence was presented or is available to the Examiner to indicate that the domain name or the website is not being used for the commission, aiding or abetting of offences listed in section 8.1.

8.5 Where there is any genuine contestable issue, the Complaint will be denied, the RSSCM proceeding will be terminated without prejudice, e.g., a RSSCM Appeal, UDRP, or a court proceeding may be utilized.

9. Determination

9.1 The Examiner may conduct his/her own investigation to collect information from the parties and rely on any other additional material, including but not limited to the content of the domain website, as evidence.

9.2 If the Complainant satisfies the burden of proof, the Examiner will issue a Determination in favor of the Complainant. The Examiner, in the Determination, may recommend suspension of the domain name:

• for the balance of the registration period and would not resolve to the original website; or
• permanently; or
• for such other period that the Examiner may deem appropriate.

9.3 The Determination will be published on the RSSCM Provider’s website. However, there should be no other preclusive effect of the Determination other than the RSSCM proceeding to which it is rendered.

9.4 If the Complainant does not satisfy the burden of proof, the RSSCM proceedings are terminated, and full control of the domain name registration shall be returned to the Registrant.

9.5 Determinations resulting from RSSCM proceedings will be published by the RSSCM Provider on the

Provider’s website in accordance with the Rules.

9.6 Determinations shall also be emailed by the RSSCM Provider to the Registrant, the Complainant, the Registrar, and the Registry Operator, and shall specify the and required actions of the Registry Operator to comply with the Determination.

9.7 To conduct RSSCM proceedings on an expedited basis, examination should begin immediately upon the earlier of the expiration of a seven (7) day Response period (or extended period if granted), or upon the submission of the Response. A Determination shall be rendered on an expedited basis, with the stated goal that it be rendered within three (3) Business Days from when the Examination began. Absent extraordinary circumstances, however, Determinations must be issued no later than five (5) days after the Response is filed.

10. Remedy

10.1 If the Determination is in favor of the Complainant, the decision shall be immediately transmitted to the Registry Operator, the Complainant, the Respondent and the Registrar.

10.2 Immediately upon receipt of the Determination, the Registry Operator shall suspend the domain name, which shall remain suspended in accordance with the suspension period stated in the Determination. The RSSCM Provider shall not be allowed to offer any other services on such a page, nor shall it directly or indirectly use the web page for advertising purposes (either for itself or any other third party). The Whois for the domain name shall continue to retain all of the information of the original Registrant. In addition, the Registry Operator shall cause the Whois to reflect that the domain name will not be able to be transferred, deleted or modified for the life of the registration.

10.3 There shall be an option for a successful Complainant to extend the registration period for one additional renewal term at commercial rates.

10.4 No other remedies should be available in the event of a Determination in favor of the Complainant.

10.5 If the Examiner rules in favor of Respondent, the Provider shall notify the Registry Operator to unlock the name and return full control of the domain name registration to the Registrant.

11. Abusive Complaints

11.1 The RSSCM shall incorporate penalties for abuse of the process by trademark holders.

11.2 A Complaint may be deemed abusive if the Examiner determines:

11.2.1 it was presented solely for improper purpose such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of doing business; and

11.2.2 (i) the claims or other assertions were not warranted by any existing law or the RSSCM standards;

or (ii) the factual contentions lacked any evidentiary support.

11.3 An Examiner may find that Complaint contained a deliberate material falsehood if it contained an assertion of fact, which at the time it was made, was made with the knowledge that it was false and which, if true, would have an impact on the outcome on the RSSCM proceeding.

11.4 In the event a party is deemed to have filed two (2) abusive Complaints, or one (1) “deliberate material falsehood,” that party shall be barred from utilizing the RSSCM for one-year following the date of issuance of a Determination finding a complainant to have: (i) filed its second abusive complaint; or (ii) filed a deliberate material falsehood.

11.5 Two findings of “deliberate material falsehood” shall permanently bar the Complainant from utilizing the RSSCM.

11.6 RSSCM Providers shall identify and track barred parties, and parties whom Examiners have determined submitted abusive complaints or deliberate material falsehoods.

11.7 The dismissal of a complaint for administrative reasons or a ruling on the merits, in itself, shall not be evidence of filing an abusive complaint.

11.8 A finding that filing of a complaint was abusive or contained a deliberate material falsehood can be appealed solely on the grounds that an Examiner abused his/her discretion or acted in an arbitrary or capricious manner.

12. Appeal

12.1 Either party shall have a right to seek a de novo appeal of the Determination based on the existing record within the RSSCM proceeding for a reasonable fee to cover the costs of the appeal. An appellant must identify the specific grounds on which the party is appealing, including why the appellant claims the Examiner’s Determination was incorrect.

12.2 The fees for an appeal shall be borne by the appellant. A limited right to introduce new admissible evidence that is material to the Determination will be allowed upon payment of an additional fee, provided the evidence clearly pre-dates the filing of the Complaint. The Appeal Panel, to be selected by the Provider, may request, in its sole discretion, further statements or documents from either of the Parties.

12.3 Filing an appeal shall not change the domain name’s resolution. For example, if the domain name no longer resolves to the original nameservers because of a Determination in favor or the Complainant, the domain name shall continue to point to the informational page provided by the RSSCM Provider. If the domain name resolves to the original nameservers because of a Determination in favor of the registrant, it shall continue to resolve during the appeal process.

12.4 An Appeal must be filed within fourteen (14) days after a Default or Final Determination is issued and any Response must be filed fourteen (14) days after an appeal is filed. If the appeal is filed after 14 days, it shall be accompanied by a condonation application with reasons for delay and the Examiner shall have the discretion to allow or refuse the appeal if there is a good faith basis for doing so.

12.5 Notice of Appeal and findings by the Appeals Panel shall be sent by the RSSCM Provider electronically to the Registrant, the Complainant, the Registrar, and the Registry Operator.

12.6 The Providers’ rules and procedures for appeals, other than those stated above, shall apply.

13. Other Available Remedies

13.1 The RSSCM Determination shall not preclude any other remedies available to the appellant, such as UDRP (if appellant is the Complainant), or other remedies as may be available in a court of competent jurisdiction. A RSSCM Determination for or against a party shall not prejudice the party in UDRP or any other proceedings.