Hazel Pegg

Just a quick thanks to all who have posted views on the Nominet DRS over the past few months. I haven't responded to all the comments (life's too short) but I think that I have read most of them. Some postings have caused me to stop and think and some have even caused me to change my mind. I'm also grateful for the 'heads-up' on several DRS decisions that I might otherwise have missed.

This is not a random posting but has come about 'cos I'm heading for a PAB sub-comm on the DRS next week so have been reviewing what has been posted to date on this forum. I don't agree with a lot of it but I am bearing it in mind.

Please keep ranting, raving and informing as appropriate

Hazel

domaingenius

Hazel


What we need to see is a mindset change from Nominet where "domainers" are not automatically bad guys and that the buying and reselling of domains is not viewed as an unethical or illegal practice, which it is not. The DRS has been made over complicated and ridiculously one sided by the rules and what is needed is a stand back look. What Nominet need to do is make the hurdle for making the *initial complaint* somewhat higher and much more importantly the complainant should need to have to prove that under TM law they would have a claim [to the domain], and NOT simply be able to twist TM laws in such a way as to claim a right that would never and does not exist under TM Laws. If a claim would not stand up to TM scrutiny then it should not be allowed to be lodged as a complaint. Let me give one simple example. A person can obtain a TM for "a" word such as say "banana" but the Patent office would ONLY grant such TM if the lettering was distinquishable and NOT simply for the common word. In such circumstances the complainant should not be able to lodge or take forward a complaint. Secondly, the cost of appeals should be much cheaper OR there should be a fee exemption facility because a lot of domainers do not have the money to pay for appeals and why should they not have access to an appeal ??.

DG

admin

I agree with you DG.

Hazel, I'm glad to see the forum is helping to highlight the issues to the right people...

__________________
Domain Appraisal | Domain Scripts | Domain Software| link to Acorn Domains

olebean

DG

The problem isn't domainer specific, FineCheeses is a classic case of that

domaingenius

I agree, some of the decisions are goddam awful, but that is caused in part by the fact that DRS allows someone to make a complaint using a TM but then the respondent cannot then use TM Law to refute the complaint,i.e. he cannot seemingly aver that the TM is only as good as the reason and classes it was granted for in the first place by the Patent Office. As for Fine Cheeses, unless the domain holder was passing off as fine cheeses LTD themselves then why on earth should they get the domain ?. I see lots of reverse hijacking coming up if that is the case !!

DG

olebean

As much as some poeple suggest Eurid have TM and rights wrong, I believe they may have it right....(in principle)

grandin

Hazel, is the sub way the best way?

Is jac on the subway committee? Subway use dishwashers not washing machines

Lee

__________________
Buy To Let Mortgages Buy To Let mortgages Discount Mortgages landlord insurance
student loan Commercial Mortgages Fixed Mortgages UK Hotels UK Holidays