Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	challenge
Date/Time:	Tue, August 14, 2001 at 6:46 PM GMT
Browser:	Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows NT 5.0
Subject:	I disagree with one aspect in this plan
Message:
Generally this has been the best proposal I've seen so far, the only key change I would make is that during the challenge, the onus should be on the Sunrise squatter to prove that he/she owns a valid TM and not the challenger. Since we all very well know that 99% of those cases are bogus, then let them get the evidence that they hold the TM. This way they can further incriminate themselves into bigger acts of fraud, if they so dare. My guess is quite a few will rather walk away.

Message Thread:

• New Proposal for Action by Afilias — domebase, August 14 @ 6:34 PM (5/12)
• But even this doesn't solve... — dtobias, August 14 @ 9:44 PM (1/1)
• You are right — tomsters, August 14 @ 10:00 PM (0/0)
• revised based on your comments — domebase, August 14 @ 7:36 PM (1/1)
• How about the potential disaster of "Closed" lists? — challenge, August 14 @ 8:29 PM (0/0)
• We got this down, now how about this other potential fiasco??? — challenge, August 14 @ 6:57 PM (0/0)
• That's a good idea but.... — tomsters, August 14 @ 6:47 PM (1/2)
• Yes, I agree that Challenge fee should be — domebase, August 14 @ 7:12 PM (1/1)
• Sounds good. — tomsters, August 14 @ 7:17 PM (0/0)
• I disagree with one aspect in this plan — challenge, August 14 @ 6:46 PM (2/3)
• I agree that burden of proof should be on Sunrise Registrant — domebase, August 14 @ 7:16 PM (0/0)
• Good idea — tomsters, August 14 @ 6:57 PM (1/1)
• Excellent! — onmove, August 14 @ 7:30 PM (0/0)

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy