Re: [gnso-rap-dt] Reverse Domain Name Hijacking as a Registration Abuse

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 1, 2009, at 1:51 PM, Roland Perry wrote:

> In message 
> <20090901095444.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.e4672b37a5.wbe@xxxxxxxxx
> ureserver.net>, at 09:54:44 on Tue, 1 Sep 2009, James M. Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> > writes
> > My only remaining question is one of scope:  Under what circumstances
> > would Reverse Hijacking (which is an abuse of process governing  
> > existing
> > names) be considered a "registration" abuse, versus a
> > "post-registration" or "use" abuse?
> I've lost track of whether we decided that the only time there can  
> ever be registration abuse is the instant a domain is first  
> registered. (If we have, it certainly clears the decks).
> But I would argue that the instant of invoking a dispute resolution  
> process to change a domains registration under duress should also  
> qualify.
> And now I'm thinking along these lines, maybe activating any process  
> to transfer a domain - what if someone is duped into making a  
> transfer (maybe that's also one of the forms of 'theft' spoken of  
> before) should be able to be scrutinised under our remit.
hm.  i wouldn't have put Reverse Domain Hijacking in the remit of this  
group -- since it's mostly a UDRP thing and doesn't have much to do  
with domain-REGISTRATION abuse.  my arm could be twisted i suppose,  
but my first reaction would be to kick this one over to a group  
working on UDRP-abuse issues...
mikey

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109
fax             866-280-2356
web     www.haven2.com
handle	OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,  
Google, etc.)