Bond amount consideration to: Re: [ga] WIPO Arbitrators Stern In Domain 'Hijacking' Rulings

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Joop and all assembly members,

Joop Teernstra wrote:

> On 13:04 28/10/01 -0800, Roeland Meyer said:
>
> >It is reasonable considering the alternative legal costs, but dropping it to
> >$25K US is also reasonable, considering that there is no set criteria. In
> >the case of an abusive complaint, which is usually brought about by a large
> >corp,
>
> I could justify $25-30 K US, but not higher.
> Not all complainants will be large corps (I would like to see statistics on
> this) and a small player defending his  trademark should not be intimidated
> by the size of the bond.

  True, not all registrants (Players, your term Joop) are large corps.
But it is a good idea to address the bond size as most US federal courts
do, with that likelihood in mind.

>
> The basic purpose is to compensate the victim of an attempted hijacking for
> his cost and trouble.

  Yes indeed true.  And if the trouble is excessive, which it can be, than
a higher bond is reasonable.  Ergo there should be no trouble with the
50k amount given Roelands nicely done explanation.

>
> Looking forward to Jeff's legal staff's effort. :)

  If an when our organization is requested to do so, I also
look forward to the same.  However that has not occurred
yet or to date.

>
>
> --Joop
>
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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