Re: [ga] Companion Dispute Proposal to WLS Service

[Marc Schneiders <marc@fuchsia.bijt.net>]

On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, at 09:18 [=GMT-0400], John Berryhill wrote:

> If WLS is implemented and it becomes the one and only way to secure
> registration of expiring names, it is clear that there will be people who
> will hoard WLS slots.  Some of the expiring names will, no doubt, correspond
> to trademarks of others, and these trademark owners will be thus prevented
> from securing registration of the domain names to which their trademark
> entitles them.
>
> Also, quite obviously, there will be parties who will seek to sell WLS slots
> in excess of whatever fee they paid to secure a WLS slot.
>
> Hence, we will be faced with WLS-squatting.
>
> In order to deal with the problem of WLS-squatting, a WLS Dispute Resolution
> Policy (WLSDRP) will obviously be required as an essential component of any
> WLS system.

Maybe we can remedy the grave injustice done to trademark owners a bit by
a WLS sunrise? I think VeriSign could easily demand $500 per domain for
sunrise WLSes.

--
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