![]() |
| 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) |
![]() |
DRS result received and yup, you’ve guessed it it’s another corker: “There is no evidence to show that the Respondent registered this Domain Name with prior knowledge of the Complainant’s business or with the primary intent to block the Complainant in any way. In fact the Respondent’s evidence that he wished to use the name as part of a portfolio of names in a business plan seems more compelling… As such there is no evidence that the Respondent registered the Domain Name primarily with a view to profiting from the name in breach of the conditions of paragraph 3(a)(i)(A). I therefore reject this part of the Complainant’s claim.” OK thanks for that Then… “There is from the Respondent no specific justification given for the adoption of these specific terms in this order…. I therefore draw the inferences set out that the Respondent registered the Domain Name for a purpose and that purpose was abusive, the purpose in question being to disrupt in some form the business of the Complainant. I therefore find that the Complainant succeeds in their claim under Paragraph 3(a)(i)(C).” Somebody’s got a good imagination and of course isn’t contradicting the previous statement So the ‘expert’ say’s “There is no evidence to show that the Respondent registered this Domain Name with prior knowledge of the Complainant’s business” then the ‘expert’ says “the Respondent registered the Domain Name for a purpose and that that purpose was abusive, the purpose in question being to disrupt in some form the business of the Complainant.”. I’ll let you draw your own conclusions… |
| |
| | #3 (permalink) | ||
![]() | Quote:
Quote:
| ||
| |
| | #5 (permalink) | |
![]() | Quote:
Agree it sounds odd, but you've only given us two paragraphs to go on. It's hard to make an informed judgement without the full decision.
__________________ Droppr - finely tuned .uk dropcatching for Nominet members Gazebo | Flyers, Postcards | Tree Surveys | Dent Repairs Leeds | Poster Printing | |
| |
| | #7 (permalink) | |
![]() Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: The Island of Mustique, St. Vincent & The Grenadines
Posts: 1,145
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Domain Trader Rating: (100% / 4) | Quote:
| |
| |
| | #8 (permalink) | |
![]() | Quote:
__________________ Jay Daley | |
| |
| | #9 (permalink) |
| Banned |
That's good to hear, there's no point having judgements if they're not worked into law to ensure future buyers aren't caught in a mess that's already been sorted on numerous occasions. And because a person might make comment in the Nominet and Sedo threads it doesn't mean it's for nominet or sedo, more that it's related comment, occasionaly however it might be that someone is wishing to attract a person's attention. It's sometimes best and good for the forum if general questions are perused here rather than in email form to the company all the time. |
| |
| | #10 (permalink) | |
![]() | Quote:
I’ll let you know when the DRS decision is posted on Nominet’s website. It’s interesting that Nominet decided to ignore the fact that the complainant had received a Police Caution over this domain, of which the complainant directors signed and accepted admitting they were guilty of the Criminal Offence of Harassment. Isn’t the Nominet ‘Policy’ such a wonderful contract? …And isn’t it nice to see they appreciate and look after their ‘Clients’. It’s such a shame that we don’t have the option to go to another UK provider who might just offer us better Contractual Terms. OFT anyone? | |
| |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Domain Name Community | Replies | Last Post |
| plurals and order | charlie | Domain Traffic / Keyword Research | 11 | 22-01-2006 11:58:52 AM |
| Anyone seen this in a whois result before? | DaveBeasley | Domain Research | 5 | 09-10-2005 09:42:21 PM |