Buy Sell Discuss UK Domain Names at AcornDomains.co.uk  Buy Sell Park Domains

Today's drop dates are 22-05-2008 & 29-05-2008  
Domain Name Sales Domain Software Cheap Domain Registration Domain Lists SedoPro Code Domains For Sale NameDrive Domain Parking
Go Back   Domain Name Forum Acorn Domains Buy Sell Trade UK Domain Names > Domain Name Disputes & Scams > Domain Name Disputes

Domain Name Disputes Discuss domain disputes, Nominet DRS or UDRP

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 28-06-2006, 10:00 AM   #21
Administrator
 
admin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,976
admin has disabled reputation
Send a message via MSN to admin

Bounce Appeal Decision - click here
__________________
9p Domains | Domain Appraisal | Droplists | Domain Brokerage | Find Valuable Domains | Link to us | Domain Software
New to UK Domain Names? - Go Here | Check Drop Dates | Domain Transfers | Game Consoles
Make more money from your Domain Names with SedoPro - PM for a free activation code!
admin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2006, 01:21 PM   #22
Jac

 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 654
Jac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond repute

Quote:
Originally Posted by invincible
I've been informed that the person that represented the Respondent is someone that recently lost a High Court case involving a contentious domain name. I also believe that the person is a member of this forum and, in any case, it is not my business to identify him. With all due respect to both the Respondent and his representative; the panel would have known full well who both of you are. Asking this individual to represent you in this appeal could, I feel, only have done you a disservice. I have no personal dislike or issue with either of you two. However don't you think the panel would have thought the choice of representation, considering previous matters, to be a little strange?
Erm.... this is a non sequitur. Just because a litigator loses one court case it does not follow that he will lose subsequent cases. The reason one loses a court case is not because they are bad or good at their job, it is simply that the presiding judge sees something in the other party's argument that sways his decision. This is why most courts will allow for appeal within their judgement.

As an aside, having had recent discussions with the "individual" you so cavalierly refer to, I would say he makes a convincing argument and is certainly capable of articulating any legal defence necessary. I would personally have no problem in recommending his services.

As an aside, have you sat across the table and argued a legal point with him? If not, it seems a tad inappropriate to make these unsubstantiated inferences as to his professional capabilities.

Regards
James Conaghan
Jac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2006, 01:26 PM   #23

 
olebean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Rarotonga
Posts: 2,268
olebean has a reputation beyond reputeolebean has a reputation beyond reputeolebean has a reputation beyond reputeolebean has a reputation beyond reputeolebean has a reputation beyond reputeolebean has a reputation beyond reputeolebean has a reputation beyond reputeolebean has a reputation beyond reputeolebean has a reputation beyond reputeolebean has a reputation beyond reputeolebean has a reputation beyond repute

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jac
I would personally have no problem in recommending his services.

As an aside, have you sat across the table and argued a legal point with him? If not, it seems a tad inappropriate to make these unsubstantiated inferences as to his professional capabilities.

Regards
James Conaghan

I echo these sentiments

OMFG we agree Jac
olebean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2006, 02:46 PM   #24

 
invincible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Island of Mustique, St. Vincent & The Grenadines
Posts: 321
invincible has a reputation beyond reputeinvincible has a reputation beyond reputeinvincible has a reputation beyond reputeinvincible has a reputation beyond reputeinvincible has a reputation beyond reputeinvincible has a reputation beyond reputeinvincible has a reputation beyond reputeinvincible has a reputation beyond reputeinvincible has a reputation beyond reputeinvincible has a reputation beyond reputeinvincible has a reputation beyond repute

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jac
Erm.... this is a non sequitur. Just because a litigator loses one court case it does not follow that he will lose subsequent cases. The reason one loses a court case is not because they are bad or good at their job, it is simply that the presiding judge sees something in the other party's argument that sways his decision. This is why most courts will allow for appeal within their judgement.

As an aside, having had recent discussions with the "individual" you so cavalierly refer to, I would say he makes a convincing argument and is certainly capable of articulating any legal defence necessary. I would personally have no problem in recommending his services.

As an aside, have you sat across the table and argued a legal point with him? If not, it seems a tad inappropriate to make these unsubstantiated inferences as to his professional capabilities.

Regards
James Conaghan
If I'd been able to attend the recent Nominet meeting, I would have done. What I was attempting to get across, whilst trying to be as non-specific as possible, was "how it might have looked". Aside from myself, three others I spoke too - all well respected - had the same opinion. None of us have an axe to grind but all of us felt the choice of representation, given the absolute specifics was unusual.

I disagree with you that appearance isn't a factor in determining a decision. I think it's a very real factor, however I am unaware of whether you have been on the respondent end of a DRS, so perhaps the concept is alien to you.

One wouldn't hire John Zuccarini to defend oneselves at a UDRP because, amongst other things, it wouldn't look good. Before anyone says it I am not saying respondents agent is comparable to JZ. I am simply trying to find an analogy to demonstrate why some might come to the opinion I , and others, have expressed.

Olebean, sneezycheese and yourself have met him. I haven't. However if people are expressing this opinion, I find it doubtful that the same thoughts wouldn't have entered the minds of the independent experts.

BTW I contemplated whether or not to make the point on here in the first place. I did so because the view has been expressed in conversation therefore I consider it relevant. Better it be raised and discussed than swept under the carpet.
invincible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2006, 02:47 PM   #25

 
sneezycheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 510
sneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond repute

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jac
Erm.... this is a non sequitur. Just because a litigator loses one court case it does not follow that he will lose subsequent cases. The reason one loses a court case is not because they are bad or good at their job, it is simply that the presiding judge sees something in the other party's argument that sways his decision. This is why most courts will allow for appeal within their judgement.

As an aside, having had recent discussions with the "individual" you so cavalierly refer to, I would say he makes a convincing argument and is certainly capable of articulating any legal defence necessary. I would personally have no problem in recommending his services.

As an aside, have you sat across the table and argued a legal point with him? If not, it seems a tad inappropriate to make these unsubstantiated inferences as to his professional capabilities.

Regards
James Conaghan
...Well said Jac!

There's enough 'assuming' going on as it is (re: 'experts' going off into 'fairy tale' mode), without having any more being layed on us.


My two peneth worth (IMHO):

1. One word 'Generics' are not only Brandable, but Trade Markable! Thus it seems will always be subject to be 'aquired' from anyone under the current DRS. So we have an IP Lawyers dream - i.e. 'Exclusive' rights to a name! - Good job the Patent Office isn't like this!

2. Two/three/etc. word descriptive generic 'Terms' may not be Trade Marked due to their 'decriptive' nature. So are they a 'safer' bet???

Mmm... Puts an interesting 'slant' on things - i.e. In light of what we've seen, what is the true value of single word Generics vs multi word descriptive ones?

Open to comments (including Nominet)...
sneezycheese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2006, 08:27 PM   #26

 
texidriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Beckofbeyond
Posts: 504
texidriver has a reputation beyond reputetexidriver has a reputation beyond reputetexidriver has a reputation beyond reputetexidriver has a reputation beyond reputetexidriver has a reputation beyond reputetexidriver has a reputation beyond reputetexidriver has a reputation beyond reputetexidriver has a reputation beyond reputetexidriver has a reputation beyond reputetexidriver has a reputation beyond reputetexidriver has a reputation beyond repute

[quote=sneezycheese]..

2. Two/three/etc. word descriptive generic 'Terms' may not be Trade Marked due to their 'decriptive' nature. So are they a 'safer' bet???

Maybe not ! (copied from another thread)

truckandtrolley.co.uk DRS

"5. Decision
I have found that
(i) the Complainant has rights in respect of a name or mark which is similar to the Domain Name and
(ii) the Domain Name in the hands of the Respondent is an Abusive Registration.
However I also have found that the words “truck and trolley” are descriptive in that form and probably generic. On that basis I am unwilling to accede to the Complainant’s application for the Domain Name to be transferred to it. I therefore direct only that the registration of the Domain Name, “truckandtrolley.co.uk” in the name of the Respondent be cancelled.
Andrew Goodman
15 October 2002"

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/1016...andtrolley.pdf
texidriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2006, 08:42 PM   #27

 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 991
grandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond reputegrandin has a reputation beyond repute

texi

you texi are quietly clever...keep up the research.

what is your background...I am intrigued?

texi thy intelligent one

Lee
grandin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2006, 09:15 PM   #28

 
Whois-Search's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London
Posts: 1,235
Whois-Search has a reputation beyond reputeWhois-Search has a reputation beyond reputeWhois-Search has a reputation beyond reputeWhois-Search has a reputation beyond reputeWhois-Search has a reputation beyond reputeWhois-Search has a reputation beyond reputeWhois-Search has a reputation beyond reputeWhois-Search has a reputation beyond reputeWhois-Search has a reputation beyond reputeWhois-Search has a reputation beyond reputeWhois-Search has a reputation beyond repute

Hope your not going to leave it there Michael ....... The DRS appeal cost you £3000 + Beasty's fee therefore carry on. Go for a Judicial Review !

I think its time we get even with these guys ......

As Nominet said at the meeting the other day www.notnominet.org.uk is perfectly ok.

How about after every DRS case like this we register the "not" version of the domain......

notbounce.co.uk

And on there have the a statement from the "coalition of DRS victims" !

Also as governments ...... i mean Nominet only change policy on the basis of bad press ......... I think everyone should contact Kieren McCarthy with their DRS story. http://www.kierenmccarthy.me.uk
Whois-Search is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-06-2006, 10:08 AM   #29
Jac

 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 654
Jac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond reputeJac has a reputation beyond repute

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whois-Search
Hope your not going to leave it there Michael ....... The DRS appeal cost you £3000 + Beasty's fee therefore carry on. Go for a Judicial Review !

I think its time we get even with these guys ......
Which guys? Nominet or the DRS Experts?

So lemme understand your philosophy. If you ever go to court and lose the case, you will also try to "get even" with those guys? (Just trying to establish the thought process here.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whois-Search
As Nominet said at the meeting the other day www.notnominet.org.uk is perfectly ok.
For the sake of fairplay and good order it might have been appropriate to also type in Nominet's reasons why they felt notnominet was okay. Assuming you are interested in fairplay and good order that is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whois-Search
How about after every DRS case like this we register the "not" version of the domain......

notbounce.co.uk

And on there have the a statement from the "coalition of DRS victims" !

Also as governments ...... i mean Nominet only change policy on the basis of bad press ......... I think everyone should contact Kieren McCarthy with their DRS story. http://www.kierenmccarthy.me.uk
Uh? Nominet do not change policy because of bad press, they change policy on the basis of stakeholder feedback. This includes members, tag holders, domainers, dropcatchers and all other stakeholder groups like government and yes! Even Kieran (gawd bless his sometimes tabloid view of things). That is why it is important for you and everyone else reading this to respond to the upcoming DRS review consultation.

As an aside, as Lee Grandin posted in another thread, it is good to see that each DRS does indeed seem to be judged on its merits... as they should be. DRS 03658 applies. However, everybody on here keeps confusing Nominet's role and the experts who actually make and write up the decisions. Nominet does not make DRS decisions, and no matter how much you protest, it doesn't make it so. Can we please inject a little reality into our observations and criticisms?

Regards
James Conaghan

Last edited by Jac; 29-06-2006 at 10:14 AM.
Jac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-06-2006, 10:27 AM   #30

 
sneezycheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 510
sneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond reputesneezycheese has a reputation beyond repute

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jac
However, everybody on here keeps confusing Nominet's role and the experts who actually make and write up the decisions. Nominet does not make DRS decisions, and no matter how much you protest, it doesn't make it so. Can we please inject a little reality into our observations and criticisms?
...REALITY:

1. Nominet make 'THE RULES'.
2. Nominet does the 'HIRING and FIRING'.

...So Nominets role is quite 'LARGE'.
sneezycheese is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Domain Name Community Replies Last Post
Phone4U.co.uk Court of Appeal Decision Beasty Domain Name Disputes 17 31-05-2006 10:13 AM
1st published ADR decision domaingenius .EU Domains 1 19-04-2006 06:34 PM
WIPO decision texidriver Domain Name Disputes 1 15-03-2006 08:44 AM
ghd.co.uk appeal decision EdPhillips Domain Name Disputes 13 03-03-2006 06:13 PM
Nominet DRS decision on 3 letter domain name Noble Pasty Domain Name Disputes 2 24-01-2006 06:11 PM


Domain Sponsor
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
All Content on this site is Copyright AcornDomains.co.uk or the respective AcornDomains.co.uk forum member and may not be reproduced without permission.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79