URS - Uniform Rapid Suspension System - RETHINK

[shaper08@xxxxxxxxxxx]

This opens the door wide for reverse hijacking, dirty tricks in ppc
campaigns, conflicting trademarks on an international level, and bad
faith claims. This also appears to put the burden of proof on the
accused rather than the accuser.

Decisions of ownership should not be taken lightly, and should not be
expedited when they can clearly cause significant economic harm to an
established enterprise which may very well be determined to be the
legitimate holder.  

This opens the door for enterprises to make dubious claims at low cost
and low risk against parties that will, in many cases, be at a
significant financial and legal resource disadvantage to defend their
legitimate holdings.   

This is like saying that a large company can file a claim and demand
that the doors of a smaller competing business be closed pending the
outcome of a filing.   It not only puts the cart before the horse, but
opens the door to a flood of bad faith claims with the intent of
removing legitimate competition.   

By making the cost of such a claim nominal, and the reaction immediate,
all barriers are removed from widespread misuse of the dispute process.

Assigning penalties before determination of ownership is clearly a bad
idea and is clearly yet another attempt by corporate lobbies to
disenfranchise any party which is at a financial and legal resource
disadvantage.

Please reconsider.





-- 
  David Eliason
  shaper08@xxxxxxxxxxx