Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	Garry Anderson
Date/Time:	Mon, August 6, 2001 at 10:58 AM GMT
Browser:	Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Subject:	Please read in context
Message:
Firstly - I answered the question about fraud - then I answered your point about 'creditcards' and 'domains'. So - how have I diverted attention away from fraud? As I understand it - creditcards.com could claim creditcards.info I have not seen anything that says otherwise. Please can you direct me to anything that says different? I said, "Each of these enables them to make claim under sunrise or use as excuse of 'consumer confussion' - take these domains off owner by UDRP." So the Sunrise Period makes no difference - they can effectively take a domain name from the legal owner later on - by UDRP. BOTH the Sunrise Period and UDRP are fatally flawed systems. My point is - nobody could be that incompetent - these are clever people. IMO the Sunrise Period was set up that way purposefully, to extract as much profit as was possible.
Link:	WIPO.org.uk

Message Thread:

• Pure Nonsense — kellyjones, August 4, 2001 @ 2:58 PM (1/12)
• Do you mean me? — Garry Anderson, August 4, 2001 @ 5:42 PM (2/11)
• Well — kellyjones, August 5, 2001 @ 7:16 AM (1/3)
• Yes you are right - it is fraudulent — Garry Anderson, August 6, 2001 @ 12:06 AM (1/2)
• Wrong again! — kellyjones, August 6, 2001 @ 9:25 AM (1/1)
• Please read in context — Garry Anderson, August 6, 2001 @ 10:58 AM (0/0)
• There is a remedy in place — Paul Gill, August 4, 2001 @ 11:41 PM (1/6)
• Wrong! — kellyjones, August 5, 2001 @ 6:52 AM (1/5)
• No, You Have It All Wrong — Paul Gill, August 5, 2001 @ 7:55 AM (2/4)
• No — kellyjones, August 6, 2001 @ 9:31 AM (1/2)
• Whats That? — Paul Gill, August 6, 2001 @ 1:06 PM (1/1)
• I checked 119 - most of them seemed bogus! — onmove, August 6, 2001 @ 5:28 PM (0/0)
• Let's not sidetrack the main issue........... — onmove, August 5, 2001 @ 9:26 AM (0/0)

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy