My response to the consultation which I just submitted:
Quote:
General observations
- the rules are prominently available only in .doc format, open formats, pdf, rtf, txt should be made available to enable wider and easier participation in the consultation.
- why have the option of a one person or a three person panel, I would prefer to see three person panels always.
Specific points:
2. c Evidence of e-mail being sent - the requirements are vague and impractical. Suggest EurID or other competent authority to run an e-mail address to which electronic correspondence can be cc'd for the purpose of establishing "proof of posting".
4 c "alternative dispute resolution body" is too vague.
12 d 1 ii "The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; "
I think this should be removed. If individuals or companies wish to register a generic or nonsense domain name they should be free to do so - this may threaten that.
C 2. "The Provider may amend these Rules at any time after receiving the prior written approval of EURid."
The Provider can add extra rules - but surely they can't amend these rules?
|