RE: [ga] ICANN benefits
At 1:11 pm -0700 4/7/01, Roeland Meyer wrote:
>> From: Sandy Harris [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>> Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 12:43 PM
>> Arguably, the UDRP is a mistake, usurping a job that should
>> be left to the
>> courts. Of course, there's also merit in the counter-argument
>> that courts
>> are ineffective and horribly expensive because of the
>> international nature
>> of the net, so we need a UDRP.
>> Methinks rehashing that debate is pointless. We have it. How
>> do we improve
>su - ; rm -rf *UDRP* *WIPO* *WTO* ; bye
#ls -l *ICANN*
-rw-rw-r-- 1 staff ipinterests 1394 Feb 6 00:48 ICANN.input.acceptance
#chmod 666 ICANN.input.acceptance
Ah. That's better
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 email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html