DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: Re[2]: [ga] Re: VeriSign Proposal a Done Deal??

At 09:58 9/01/02, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>How would you answer the question I asked?  For a re-registration of a
>released name, is the permission of the previous registrant needed?


That answer was already given:
Yes, under some circumstances, especially when the registry has been put on 
notice of TM rights, it would be strongly advisable for a registrar or TLD 
registry to seek that permission.

Now how about answering the implied questions of my original point:
Would you not like to see a feature incorporated in Verisign's registration 
database, that would read:
DN Holder Permission for placing the Domain on a waiting list obtained? (Y/N)

DN Holder Permission for re-registration to third party obtained (Y/N) ?

If I were a new Registrant of a another's deleted Name, I would certainly 
appreciate such information.

Do you not think registrars should compete with such registrant-friendly 
features that would enhance the secure holding of the Name?

Finally, (but you don't have to answer this one) do you not think that the 
shareholders in your company would applaud an active attempt by VRSN to do 
something about its image?


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

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>