Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ
| Username: |
dingle |
| Date/Time: |
Tue, August 7, 2001 at 5:01 AM GMT |
| Browser: |
Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.01 using Windows 98 |
| Subject: |
I agree to an extent |
Message: |
|
I agree that most of these were not foreign - however,
a number that I saw looked like genuine errors - each registrar had its own form
so the fact that a number came from one is not surprising. I'm not saying most weren't
bogus, just not all. What I wonder is what is going on at Afilias now. I bet there's
lawyers running all over the place. They now have contracts with all of their registrars
who have contracts with all of their applicants saying "this is how we'll do it."
They can't just scrap it now and do it another way without getting sued hundreds
of times. Also, if they were to "check all apps from this point on after deleting
the fake apps" how are they going to check the Egyptian and other "trademarks" that
can't be searched online? What they should have done in the first place is said once
you are allocated a sunrise domain you have 2 months to file a certified copy of
your tm registration. If you don't it lapses and goes first back to the sunrise pool,
and if there are no valid tms, to the landrush pool. Bit late to try that now though.
At the end of the day as long as genuine trade mark owners can challenge, I don't
really care if the truly generic names end up with someone from the landrush or a
fraud from the sunrise. Either would sell the domain anyway and neither is likely
to actually want to use the domain so in my view they are as bad as each other. Let
the genuine users have a go!
|
|
|
Message Thread:
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy