[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] Transfer Protocol Perjury Stipulation
At 05:16 AM 12/07/1999 -0700, d3nnis wrote:
>Today's teleconference included a slightly scarey discussion regarding the
>clamping down on domain name registrants who flee to a new registrar to
>pending dispute or cease and desist letter. The option of requiring
registrant hoppers to
>sign a statement declaring themselves free of such baggage was given some
very sharp teeth:
>the penalty of perjury.
>As an individual domain name owner I noticed acutely the absence of any
spokesperson for my
>perspective on this issue. So I include it here.
The absence of any spokesperson for the Individual Domain Name registrants
on the pNC teleconf has very serious implications for the legitimacy or
acceptance of any of its resolutions.
I call on all fair minded participants in this teleconf to rectify this
before the next conference call. You know that there is a constituency for
Individual Domain Name Owners.
On substance: the proposed "anti forum shopping measure" elevates a simple
cease and desist letter to a major hurdle in transferring Domain names,
thereby further encouraging the frivolous issue of such letters by
unscrupulous law firms.
Quite apart from the fact that in many non-western cultures the issuing of
a sworn statement of any kind is a costly and highly bureaucratic affair.
On the teleconf I heard about undue burdens for registrars, but there was
no one to speak for the registrants. In case of the absence of disputes,
such burdens are totally unwarranted.
--Joop Teernstra LL.M.-- , bootstrap of
the Cyberspace Association,
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners