Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	domebase
Date/Time:	Tue, August 14, 2001 at 7:36 PM GMT
Browser:	Netscape Communicator V4.7 using Windows NT
Subject:	revised based on your comments
Message:
"PROPOSAL A*": (REVISED 8/14/01, 5:30 pm):  Here is a proposal that should make everyone happy except Sunrise Squatters. a.1: Run the Land Rush for all names, including those registered in the Sunrise Period. a.2: For names not registered in the Sunrise Period, the Land Rush winner gets the name as originally planned.  a.3: For names registered in the Sunrise Period, the Land Rush winner does not get the name, but does get the chance to submit a Sunrise Challenge for that name after the 120 day Sunrise Challenge period is over (after all other challenges are done) for free or a minimal fee ($0-$40?).   If the Sunrise registrant can not prove that he/she has a valid trademark in accordance with the Sunrise Period rules, then the Land Rush winner gets the name without the need to show a trademark for the name. This proposal would protect legitimate trademark holders, restore substance and integrity to the Land Rush period, and avoid global warming... Well, two out of three ain't bad. ------------------------------- This does not address short-list submissions by registrars... but geepers, that might be too much of a battle to fight, especially at this late hour.
Link:	DomeBase.com

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