Re: [ga] ICANN benefits

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

the UDRP was a deal made with the IP group.  plain and simple, if they were
required to follow the IANA contract and the APA, especially the APA there would
be no UDRP.

Andy Gardner wrote:

> >-No policing by ICANN of the supplemental rules instituted by the providers
> >to ensure they mesh with the ICANN rules (for instance see
> >http://www.arbforum.com/domains/decisions/95344.htm)
>
> The decision for that case, and that case alone, should have been enough
> proof of the stupidity of the current system to have the UDRP frozen and no
> more cases heard until it was repaired.
>
> Digusting.
>
> How to steal a domain name using the UDRP.
>
> Publish a magazine using that domain name (that you don't and have never
> owned) on the masthead, then claim "consumer confusion" and get some Arb
> Forum "arbitrators" to give you the name.
>
> What a sham.
>
> And still it continues.
>
> --
> Andrew P. Gardner
> barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
> We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
> Get active: http://www.domain-owners.org http://www.tldlobby.com
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

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