3 Cases Respondent Table

[Whois-Search]

A 3 Cases Respondent Table has just appered on the Nominet website?

3 cases respondent table

Will this now be used for "loser pays" ?

Or just to answer the FAQ:

Is there is a list of people potentially covered by the "Three-strikes" rule in Policy 3(c)?

Yes. However, it is up to the expert in each dispute to decide whether to apply it.

 

[olebean]

Again I am unsure if Nominet can post personal names in a manner that suggests they may be guilty of something... If it was me I'd threaten them with defamation of character

 

[grandin]

Fair is fair

I must say this action is good.....it is pretty wrong for someone to keep abusing other peoples rights...time and time again.

Lee

 

[Beasty]

I must say this action is good.....it is pretty wrong for someone to keep abusing other peoples rights...time and time again.

Lee

Agreed - though this one is a bit of a shocker - alternate.co.uk.

 

[Nigel]

Agreed - though this one is a bit of a shocker - alternate.co.uk.

Hi Jim

That certainly was a 'shocker' to most of us here at acorn. Also it seems unfair that the 3 strikes rule doesn't seem to give any allowance for the size of a portfolio i.e. Someone registers 10 dubious domains and gets 3 DRSs in 2 years and is treated the same as a portfolio holder of 10,000 generic domains (words like 'fine cheeses') who has a bad two years because someone in the legal field targets them using the PRSS Nominet decided to make public. Is it also possible to explain to us how the 3 DRS in 2 years works because I looked at that alternate case and the dates of the 3 DRSs that Nominet have grouped together. The 3 DRS decisions appear to have been made on:

1) 28/10/02 - DRS 0570
2) 25/10/05 - DRS 02921
3) 19/3/06 - DRS 03332

The way I see it it appears there have only ever been 2 DRSs in a 2 year period. Am I missing something Jim? i.e No 1 appears to be out of the 2 year time frame before No2 and No3 came along. Insight to the working of the 3 strikes/ 2 year rule would be most appreciated. I don't think anyone with a large portfolio should overlook this part of the DRS and assume that the 3 strikes rule won't ever affect them. Just think 'fine cheeses' 3 times

 

[grandin]

learn by mistakes

I am glad I went through the DRS because I truly didn't realise that you could be shafted by a later right. This has jumped me into gear to develop all my names at rocket pace. It is only with use that you can protect your rights, I thought I could sit on them and have a legitimate right to use them for whatever but under the law that clearly isn't the case.

So I am thank ful to Nominet in that respect but that doesn't excuse having to pay professional fees for something that ended up rather bargain basement

Lee

 

[Nigel]

Fair point Lee

But why aren't earnings from ppc adverts not viewed as 'use'? I'm sure any court would interpret the term 'use' in its plain and simple meaning.

Also what's your view of how the 3 strikes rule works? is it 3 DRSs in a 2 year period?

 

[grandin]

ppc

Nigel, the following is my point of view that i put to ed at Nominet....he did not reply but he does normally reply....

I said that ppc is a directory linked specifically to what is being searched ie. it is no different to yell.com reselling classifications.....

For example:-

I own serveral towns and I could (but i dont) have a ppc page. I am sure the ad words would be town related ie. shoes shop in wokingham or postoffice in wokingham or tescos in wokingham......that is offering a service no different to yell and if you did the same with a trade name that represented many businesses and surnames ie. mercer then thats offering a legitimate service BUT BUT BUT and BIG BUT.....IF the mercer competitor under lets say mercer case was to lodge with adsense for its competitors term...mercer. Then you would be held jointly responsible if the competitors listings was on your ppc page...do you get what I am trying to say????

Their could be a legitimate unbeknowst to the registrant syndrome....you place the name with a parking company and act in good faith thinking that competitors wouldn't take advantage of anothers rights by parking with google and subsequently with you page.....maybe a case for counter sueing google....beasty tell us more????

Beasty did you get my email and did you reply?

Lee

 

[domaingenius]

Has anyone heard the saying "thin end of the wedge" ?. I can see in the not too distant future the domains listed as abusive will be of the likes "bounce" ,"finecheeses" etc etc etc. As I have said before, as domains become scarcer the more the big money men will twist the rules, with the help of the likes of the new chairman of Nominet, to suit themselves and grab the domains from anyone that has a domain they want and dont want to pay for. Wait and see .

DG

 

[yesterday]

It all only depends on the quality of the strike.

If they keep churning out the sort of decisions we've seen then this is only 3 x better than it was before, (and only 3).

3 strikers (panel of experts) choosing 1 decision would be better than 1 striker choosing 3.

But 3 strikers and 3 strikes would be better still.

I think a dodgy decision should be rubbed off the list, and credits added.


yesterday

 

[sneezycheese]

Has anyone heard the saying "thin end of the wedge" ?. I can see in the not too distant future the domains listed as abusive will be of the likes "bounce" ,"finecheeses" etc etc etc. As I have said before, as domains become scarcer the more the big money men will twist the rules, with the help of the likes of the new chairman of Nominet, to suit themselves and grab the domains from anyone that has a domain they want and dont want to pay for. Wait and see .

DG

...An 'On The Money' statement, if there ever was one!

And it's all our own fault - i.e. we don't band together and fight - we just gripe.

Effort and conviction is requied - sadly something that is lacking in this arena!

Regards,

Sneezy.

 

[Whois-Search]

Again I am unsure if Nominet can post personal names in a manner that suggests they may be guilty of something... If it was me I'd threaten them with defamation of character

Also though I don't agree with the names they registered I believe that some of the current 3 strikers are rather rich domainers:

Balata.com LLC (TAG = Domainspa) is Igal Lichtman Domain Name Journal - Cover Story - DomainSpa.com

Robert Morrison Quarter-Million Dollar Sale of Malta.com

i.e. worth far more than Nominet's legal budget or turnover thelawyer.com - 14 February 2005

 

[grandin]

Nominet is not the DRS

Don't forget Nominet is not the DRS, as such they must stand by their contract of registration not the DRS. Unless you are in breach of your contractual duties Nominet have no grounds to end your contract.

The current contract requires the registrant to have infringed on the intellectual property rights of another ie. this is not evidenced by a DRS decision as the DRS deals with abuse not infringement. Under another clause they can cancel the domain name if you break the rules of the DRS (not transfer) but....

An expert can order a transfer but such action cannot be actioned without the cancellation of the contract of registration BUT once cancelled there is nothing to transfer...round and round we go like a teddy bear. Nominet's policy is first come first served so I don't see how the contract can allow a transfer.

If anyone has had a domain name transferred as a result of a DRS decision then ask Nominet this:-

Nominet have cancelled my contract of registration without my consent. Please confirm the contractual duty I was in breach of?

My direct question to Nominet is still to be answered.

Lee

 

[olebean]

If a domain is transfered does the new registrant pay registration fees?

 

[domaingenius]

What I would like to see is domainers etc forming an association and through that association make a relationship with a *good* (and I mean good because 90% of solicitors are crap) solicitor who knows his stuff in regard to domains and can defend out rights through the association. We could have a panel of maybe 5 members who would review requests for legal assistance before hand. Could arrange a monthly membership fee (that would be the only fly in the ointment I could see).

DG

 

[sneezycheese]

What I would like to see is domainers etc forming an association and through that association make a relationship with a *good* (and I mean good because 90% of solicitors are crap) solicitor who knows his stuff in regard to domains and can defend out rights through the association. We could have a panel of maybe 5 members who would review requests for legal assistance before hand. Could arrange a monthly membership fee (that would be the only fly in the ointment I could see).

DG

...Spooky - I had this very idea a while ago and raised the issue on this forum: http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/general-board/7069-questions-setting-up-domainer-association.html?highlight=association

I personnaly think it would be a fantastic idea and would gladly assist in setting one up if the demand for it were there!

...And I'm sure Beasty would be happy to be our Legal Expert.

I know - lets do it anyway and see what the take up is - As the saying goes "from little acorns... etc., etc."

Regards,

Sneezy.

 

[grandin]

DRS Service

My DRS service is free....all in good spirit i will defend any like minded good soul....court action aint for me...saying that i dont mind others taking me to court....saying that i havent had to go to court thus so far

judges are best placed to decide all decisions.....they create history which i am sure they love but noone wants to go down in history as a right plonka!!!

drs is nothing but a admin function thus experts in that arena have nothing to gain or lose....they are admin

Lee

 

[domainking]

Has anyone heard the saying "thin end of the wedge" ?. I can see in the not too distant future the domains listed as abusive will be of the likes "bounce" ,"finecheeses" etc etc etc. As I have said before, as domains become scarcer the more the big money men will twist the rules, with the help of the likes of the new chairman of Nominet, to suit themselves and grab the domains from anyone that has a domain they want and dont want to pay for. Wait and see .

DG

Domaingenius i think your spot on with this
what people have to do is check out the so called independant domain experts who sit on the drs you will find if you dig deep that some of them have links to commercial business that conflict with there expert choice.
what you have to ask nominet is why so many members of nominet drs are members of the law society of england and law society of scotland a secret we club that that steals property and runs a cartel under european law.
and also wonder what nominet makes of the european free trade rules that allow anyone to the right of free trade in europe.

so nominet claiming back the name through the drs i think could be breaking european free trade rules. maybe edd wuld like to answer that.

 

[domainking]

also here is a question
how many domainers who are tag members of nominet
sit on the dispute panel the anser im sure is 0

maybe its time that domainer Tag Members apply to become experts on the DRS would be intresting to see if any get accepted.

Then you will find out what nominet is all about its a gravy train for the lawyers and the few others.

 

[domaingenius]

Yep if we dont want problems in the future we need to stand united and get the DRS corrected so it is not a walk over. However Nominet do not want the drs to be too hard for grumblers (complainants) to grab back the domains and thus although they allow the complainant to use the TM law to issue the complaint they then shut the door on the respondents using the TM laws in reply.

DG