DRS twice?

disruptive · 02-04-2007, 10:19:49 AM

I had a DRS and the complainant dropped the complainant and now I find a new complaint. How can this be possible...in my eyes are abusing the system. Has anyone had any related experience?

retired_member6 · 02-04-2007, 10:31:50 AM

It maybe connected, the first trying to find out your arguement before presenting another. If you can prove it you should win outright.

rob · 02-04-2007, 10:45:57 AM

What would happen if two large portfolio owners each say open 1000 DRS claims against each other - free to do , and requires a fair amount of work Nominets end.

Perhaps some of the hassle that domain owners suffer may be understood better in Nominet towers

tifosi · 02-04-2007, 11:10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob

What would happen if two large portfolio owners each say open 1000 DRS claims against each other - free to do , and requires a fair amount of work Nominets end.

Perhaps some of the hassle that domain owners suffer may be understood better in Nominet towers

you offerin'?

keys · 02-04-2007, 11:49:43 AM

Would you believe that one large comapny has used DRS twice to recover the same name - then still did not renew it. I wonder how long it will be until their third DRS. I doubt the "experts" will be impressed, but probably grateful for the extra work.

Beasty · 02-04-2007, 11:57:44 AM

There are rules about this - but they largely relate to completed cases. Even they are possible - as the 1&1 cases show.

What you describe is akin to "DRS tasting" - throw out a line, see what you get back and then revise before submitting again. It can not happen under the UDRP - you have to pay your fee and start the process towards a decision there.

The rules should make it clear that if you start a claim, get a defence and then drop it - then unless the situation changes significantly (e.g. change of use or user) then you've used up your claim on that domain.

The best you can hope for is to highlight what has happened and unless there has been a material change on your side, the right expert should take a dim view of their tactics.

You could also start a petition on here calling for the rules to be changed during the current review - I'll put my hand up for that one.

disruptive · 02-04-2007, 02:30:05 PM

I am a bit annoyed, but not that much. The guys doing the complaining I think are simply time-wasters...I will make it clear their tactics and their generally pernicous behaviour.

Beasty · 02-04-2007, 02:48:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by disruptive

I am a bit annoyed, but not that much. The guys doing the complaining I think are simply time-wasters...I will make it clear their tactics and their generally pernicous behaviour.

Thye can of course keep sending in Complaints until you are away/ill/the post is slow - then they will have no response to deal with. If the facts are clear enough, maybe you should ask Nominet to keep a standard response on file for you!

disruptive · 02-04-2007, 03:49:59 PM

This must be a form of abuse...

I feel like a double jeopardy case.

Beasty · 03-04-2007, 03:05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by disruptive

This must be a form of abuse...

I feel like a double jeopardy case.

The guy in bernardmatthews.co.uk suffered quadruple jeopardy (Old DRS - won; high court - won; new DRS - lost; court again - settled) and each of those went to a decision/hearing/settlement. You have got a way to go before you break the record - but you are right that systematic abuse of this type is not only allowed by the DRS - but to some extent encouraged...

I quote from Nominet's standard letter when the Complainant is asked to pay the fee for an Expert or allow the matter to drop:

Quote:

If your client decides not to pay for a decision

The domain name will not be transferred. We will close the DRS case and take no further action. Your client will be able to start another DRS dispute later, if they want to.

Not even a hint of sanction or prohibition of such conduct - in fact almost an invitation to drop it now and try again later. If the Complainant had been obliged to pay their fee up front (which even the imperfect UDRP requires) then the Respondent could pocket the �750 +VAT for their trouble and the Complainant's right to bring a future DRS should be expressly (and publicly) limited to any new facts that arise subsequently. Parties should only get one bite at the cherry, if the system wants to be taken seriously.

I invite Gordon or any other director/representative of Nominet to defend their conduct in this type of situation.

02-04-2007, 10:19:49 AM	#1 (permalink)
disruptive Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 1,379 Classified Rating: 0% (-1) Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 4)	DRS twice? I had a DRS and the complainant dropped the complainant and now I find a new complaint. How can this be possible...in my eyes are abusing the system. Has anyone had any related experience? __________________ SOCIALNETWORK.CO.UK\|QuoteSmart.CO.UK\|Photovoltaics.CO.UK\|APPROVAL.CO.UK\|Genetic Testing for Health - Xmas Special

02-04-2007, 02:30:05 PM	#7 (permalink)
disruptive Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 1,379 Classified Rating: 0% (-1) Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 4)	I am a bit annoyed, but not that much. The guys doing the complaining I think are simply time-wasters...I will make it clear their tactics and their generally pernicous behaviour. __________________ SOCIALNETWORK.CO.UK\|QuoteSmart.CO.UK\|Photovoltaics.CO.UK\|APPROVAL.CO.UK\|Genetic Testing for Health - Xmas Special

02-04-2007, 03:49:59 PM	#9 (permalink)
disruptive Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 1,379 Classified Rating: 0% (-1) Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 4)	This must be a form of abuse... I feel like a double jeopardy case. __________________ SOCIALNETWORK.CO.UK\|QuoteSmart.CO.UK\|Photovoltaics.CO.UK\|APPROVAL.CO.UK\|Genetic Testing for Health - Xmas Special

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

02-04-2007, 10:31:50 AM	#2 (permalink)
retired_member6 Banned Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 5,643 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 41)	It maybe connected, the first trying to find out your arguement before presenting another. If you can prove it you should win outright.

02-04-2007, 10:45:57 AM	#3 (permalink)
rob Founding Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,976 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 37)	What would happen if two large portfolio owners each say open 1000 DRS claims against each other - free to do , and requires a fair amount of work Nominets end. Perhaps some of the hassle that domain owners suffer may be understood better in Nominet towers

02-04-2007, 11:49:43 AM	#5 (permalink)
keys Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 759 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 11)	Would you believe that one large comapny has used DRS twice to recover the same name - then still did not renew it. I wonder how long it will be until their third DRS. I doubt the "experts" will be impressed, but probably grateful for the extra work.

02-04-2007, 11:57:44 AM	#6 (permalink)
Beasty Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 616 No Classified Ratings Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 1)	There are rules about this - but they largely relate to completed cases. Even they are possible - as the 1&1 cases show. What you describe is akin to "DRS tasting" - throw out a line, see what you get back and then revise before submitting again. It can not happen under the UDRP - you have to pay your fee and start the process towards a decision there. The rules should make it clear that if you start a claim, get a defence and then drop it - then unless the situation changes significantly (e.g. change of use or user) then you've used up your claim on that domain. The best you can hope for is to highlight what has happened and unless there has been a material change on your side, the right expert should take a dim view of their tactics. You could also start a petition on here calling for the rules to be changed during the current review - I'll put my hand up for that one.