View Single Post
Old 28-09-2006, 12:13:52 PM     #10 (permalink)
grandin

 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,273
grandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond repute

new evidence

'seeing evidence in a Response from him - either on the topic of whether the domain name was generic or descriptive; or on his reasons for registration and later use'

Retrial can occur IF new evidence is brought forward...Nominet has accepted in this statement that evidence was missing due to an internal problem

Therefore:-

Was Client paid off

or

Set it up for a retrial

Nominet may prefer a retrial to set the POLICY straight....bounce doesnt sit very nice.

My personal opinion is that the Appeal experts got it wrong....

Detrimental to the complainants rights? Yes

Unfairly detrimental to the complainants rights? NO

The onset of the web says that many domains could infringe on others rights BUT the question is.....Does it UNFAIRLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS RIGHTS

The fact that I have a restricted Trade Mark in the term VISIONIST has truly highlighted the problem with the POLICY re rights.

Lee

Last edited by grandin; 28-09-2006 at 12:35:28 PM. Reason: blob
grandin is offline