Re: [ga] FYI: WLS Vote of Transfers Task Force

[eric@hi-tek.com]

I am afraid that we simply must resign our thoughts to routing around the WLS
concept as applied to .com.
But then again, I think that we are all aware enough to route around .com as a
whole and move on to more stable TLDs like ccTLDs and inclusives.

Eric

"J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" wrote:

> On 23:31 29/07/02, Dan Steinberg said:
> >so for the sake of continuity, I ask the question again.  Every TM
> >specialist who argued for or against the WLS in front of the task force
> >seemed to agree WLS was intellectual property neutral, a position I happen
> >to agree with.
>
> I am afraid that these specialists forgot a detail. The WLS should be
> accepted in the DN registration agreement (or renewal for the current DNs).
> That agreement also accepts the UDRP.
>
> The WLS is not transparent to the TM in that sense that one can take
> advantage from it to defend cross-TM class boarder rights and jurisprudence
> would say if there is something in there or not. But WLS+UDRP agreement in
> the *same* document is lethal to TM. The reason why is that in accepting
> the UDRP principle you accept that good faith is a good reason to get a DN.
> SO you accept that your successor in your own DN is entitled to show his
> own good faith against UDRP challengers. This entitles your potential
> successor to take every reasonable step to that end.
>
> 1. this leads to TMsquatting
> 2. there is no procedure for you to UDRP your WLSuccessor
>
> Another problem is that you pay for a WLS after having estimated your
> chances that the present owne go bankrupt or lose interest in the DN. Now
> an UDRP can change the owner with very low chances that he will drop the
> DN. Will you be returned you money, can you claim for compensation? against
> who? Can you protect your rights in sharing in the UDRP? Can you impeach
> the current owner to sell his DN?
> jfc

--
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