![]() |
|
| Domain Name Sales | Domain Software | Calculate UK Domain Drop Dates | Domain Registration | NameDrive | Domain Parking | Subscribe to our Domains For Sale newsletter |
| | ||||||
| Home | Register | Rules | Membership Upgrade | Domains For Sale | Domain Name Escrow | Mark Forums Read | Domain Classified | Chat Room |
| Domain Name Disputes Discuss domain disputes, Nominet DRS or UDRP |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 (permalink) |
![]() | Can a DRS consultation reply be used against you?
When you make a reply to the DRS consultation, your comment gets listed on the bottom of the page: Updating the .uk Dispute Resolution Service Google then picks up the pdf. Example: chris holland drs - Google Search Can your comments in that then be used in a future DRS as evidance of abuse? Also if I replied to the DRS consultation say in favour of domainers and then I stood for the PAB in March..... someone would just quote me on nom-steer. Should these comments remain private? Or do you just have to watch what you say and take the risk.
__________________ Andrew Bennett - www.whois-search.com Linkedin: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/andrewgbennett |
| |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| Founding Member |
CH's reply is a gem To balance the situation where a three time losing respondent has the automatic assumption of bad faith presumed against him (or "her" if it is one of these new phantom tags in the names of existing tagholder's girlfriends, wives, cats and landladies etc), we would like for a penalty to be imposed on a sliding scale pro rata to the predatory complainant's annual published turnover if a finding of "attempted reverse domain name hijacking" is determined by the expert. So if a £5bn annual turnover FSTE 100 member attempts to steal my trainers.co.uk domain on the basis of an expired Ecuadorian trademark and is found to have tried to reverse domain name hijack my valuable property, they should pay a penalty of £5,000 or £10,000. This payment should be made directly to the winning respondent. |
| |
| | #3 (permalink) | |
![]() | Quote:
DG | |
| |
| | #4 (permalink) |
![]() | DRS views
DG I think you are being paranoid. The Consultation is open to anyone to give views on how to construct a workable DRS. You have to follow rules under the contract, views do not constitute a breach of rules. I would be more concerned with any views posted under Acorn. I have written a part 1 of a 2 part but I have left it at home today. I will file it tomorrow. Lee |
| |
| | #5 (permalink) | |
![]() | Quote:
| |
| |
| | #8 (permalink) |
![]() | |
| |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Domain Name Community | Replies | Last Post |
| Domain administrator criticised over consultation - ZDNet.com.au | RSS | Domain Name News | 1 | 28-03-2006 09:53:39 AM |
| DRS Reply Address | retired_member6 | Domain Name Disputes | 4 | 25-03-2006 07:09:43 PM |