fairplay

I certainly dont want anyone else drawn into a situation where they could be held responsible and I didnt think a forum could be held for anything people posted, discussed, debated?

fairplay

Good idea?: As I came into this late, I didnt realise this was actually a 'sales' string, the only reason its here is because (rob) published the Nominet pdf.

I didnt know there was a DRS section either, could this whole part, from rob's insert be moved to the DRS section??

fairplay

Admin could everything from rob's pdf be moved to Domain Name Disputes as I'm guessing this is what GreyWing was referring to??

rob

It is not my PDF Why do you think that?!

Likewise, forum owners can be responsible for posts.

philipp

Only because it looks very unlikely they'll get to keep the domain. It would seem like a reasonably pragmatic damage limitation approach if they aren't going to appeal.

Just my opinion, take or leave as appropriate

P.

__________________
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast.

GreyWing

Well that's what I said if you would have quoted my sentence to it's full.

"Hi Phillip, first point would have to be, why should they? I understand being practicable but principles at stake."

But being pragmatic should not come second best to principles, if I come and said I'm taking your house but I'm going to give you £10,000 compensation to be pragmatic, you going to take it? or you going to be a bit pee'd off. If we were living in China then maybe you would except that behaviour.

Personally I don't think the names is worth £100, but if someone has been using it and they were using it first, then it's up to them what happens with that name. It's not for those that have money to start bossing around those that don't, well maybe nominet think it is because their decisions go with the money 99% of the time.

All the best
GW

__________________
Make cash from your website, any website, any sector... That.co.uk Find out more

fairplay

I meant it was you who posted the Nominet pdf in this string rob...

fairplay

Everyone seems to miss the point that these people promised to come up with an agreeable offer - or at least no-one is commenting on this?

They accused the owner of something that was proven to be a lie. The experts decision is supposed to be based on the fact that the claimant had proven their case, they have not proven anything and thats because the owner has clear and obvious prior-rights, this experts decision is clearly full of procedural irregularity.

The owner has 2 days to either appeal or take them to court and I really would appreciate it if anyone could read through the pdf and to point out any parts where you feel he could use to form his appeal document. He has never written one before and is not quite sure how it should be presented.

Please (if anyone can spare the time) read the document and either post what you think can help or pm me.

Plus if anyone can advise how you start a court case that would be very helpful.

Thanks in anticipation...

fairplay

I respect what admin has asked for and I wont publish the answer back from Nominets top solicitor who the owner asked to intervene on an unfair decision but I must share this little excerpt with you and ask for your response.

" ...I cannot intervene in this case. In reaching this position I am not agreeing or disagreeing with the merits of the actual decision."

The owner wants to take them on but is upset by a decision that he still cannot believe. Even when people told him that when BIG companies are involved and complain to Nominet that BIG business wins, he refused to believe this.

He now knows that an unbelievable 99% goes with the monied corporates but worse than this the percentages for winning an appeal is even less!!!

On the other side he believes that if three experts are looking at this they must realise how wrong this is and do the right thing, or a court must surely find and overturn this ludicrous decision.

sneezycheese

My thoughts and Opinions:

1. The 'experts' are acting on behalf of Nominet effectively as 'sub-contractors'.

2. Liability ultimately lies with Nominet - obvious really when you think about it.

3. Follow Nominets Complaints Proceedure detailing the important 'issues', including asking for the domain not to be transfered at this time - details on how to do this can be found here:

Complaints

4. If this doesn't resolve the issues apply to the court (as I previously mentioned), as long as you can proove the decision was based on false evidence or or/and incorrect assumptions by the 'expert', and/or any breach of contract by Nominet.

Remember: This is my thoughts and opinions and does not constitute legal advice.

Regards,

Sneezy.