[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [wg-b] food for thought

I believe that I said "local"? "Local" in this case, means local
jurisdiction. MHSC has to conform to the laws of the state of Delaware
and the Federal government of the USofA. That is all we have to listen
to. Anything else is strictly courtesy. There are procedura channels
extant which will bring issues into those jurisdictions. They are
adequate. It is strictly a matter of process and procedure. Well known
process and procedure at that.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:Harald@Alvestrand.no]
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 1999 10:26 AM
> To: rmeyer@mhsc.com; Judith Oppenheimer
> Cc: Wg-B@Dnso. Org
> Subject: RE: [wg-b] food for thought
> At 09:17 23.09.99 -0700, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> >Compared to this, the simple policy, of
> First-Come-First-Served (FCFS),
> >is looking more attractive by the minute. Also, exclusionary policies
> >appear to be an open-door to bankruptcy, with one exception. The
> >registry requires the presentation of a registered trademark
> of the same
> >name as the new domain, from the registrant. In this case, the real
> >effective registry becomes the local PTO. This would "clear" the name
> >before it enters the DNS and shifts liability to the PTO, rather than
> >the registry.
> Roeland,
> PTO??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
>               Harald
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, Maxware, Norway
> Harald.Alvestrand@maxware.no