Your proposal seems very similar to mine and I think
either would be a whole lot better than the way things are unfolding now. It
is late and I am tired, but I do think that there might be one or two differences...
proposal explicitly gives a Land Rush winner the right to challenge and keep a name
(for a modest fee) without claim to trademark rights after the end of the challenge
period. (Land Rush winner would only be able to successfully challenge a Sunrise
Squatter. Legit trademark holders need not fear.)
I believe that your proposal
gives the Land Rush winner the right to get the name after the end of the challenge
period (for free) if it has been challenged and is not held by a legit trademark
holder. In your words -- "This name is taken, but in the event of a Challenge
succeeding, and no other Trademark holder claiming it, it is reserved for you as
Difference #1: How would it be determined that no Trademark holder
claims it without an end-point challenge process?
Difference #2: Do you
really mean "other" trademark holder? The word "other" sounds like the Land
Rush winner needs have trademark rights on a name to get it -- which leaves us in
our current pickle for non-trademarked names.
Difference #3: If we are certain
that Land Rush winner can challenge name (for net $75), then either proposal gives
Land Rush winner right to challenge if he/she wishes. This right is more explicit
in my proposal, but if we are certain then the two proposals are very similar in
Keep at it. Let's try to get something like this activated
before the Land Rush period. I would welcome getting in touch if you would
like to send me an e-mail at webmaster@DomeBase.com.
I should add that "my"
proposal really builds on ideas of other folks, I'll work on better attribution next