RE: Re[4]: [ga] WIPO Arbitrators Stern In Domain 'Hijacking' Rulings

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: William X Walsh [mailto:william@userfriendly.com]
|> Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 10:33 AM
|> To: Dassa
|> Cc: General Assembly of the DNSO
|> Subject: Re[4]: [ga] WIPO Arbitrators Stern In Domain 'Hijacking'
|> Rulings
|>
|> Well, that would be hear impossible in some cases, since the UDRP is a
|> "virtual" environment without respect to locality, and a court case
|> would have to be taken in the appropriate jurisdiction.

True.  And as the UDRP can already make decisions in one direction it would
be reasonable for compensation to be granted not only in cases of reverse
hi-jacking attempts but also frivolous claims.

|> Since the UDRP is already able to strip some one of their domain name,
|> I think it fair that it also be able to access a penalty when someone
|> abuses that process and grant compensation to the victim.  And I think
|> a refusal to agree to do that should be grounds for denial of access
|> to the UDRP proceedings at all.

It seems a reasonable proposal to me.  I would like it stipulated that any
such compensation or penalty should go directly to the domain name holder
and not into the UDRP coffers.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html