Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	onmove
Date/Time:	Sat, October 20, 2001 at 9:48 PM GMT
Browser:	Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.01 using Windows 95
Subject:	Please consider this.......
Message:
I would agree with you when it comes to well known names like Cocacola and many more like it.  But, .info process is unlike .com.  There was the sunrise period for TM/SM holders.(It's different issue that sunrise period was observed more in breach) So, when a member of general public registers any name in landrush or live period after checking its availability, he has some basis to assume that there is no TM/SM claim on it.  I am not suggesting that this will be the only deciding factor.  But, in my view this element can not be completely excluded from decision making process. Amar Ochani

Message Thread:

• Reversed Domain Hijacking: The rules — spot, October 19 @ 7:29 PM (2/27)
• What flipping rules? — Garry Anderson, October 20 @ 4:57 PM (0/0)
• answers — DaveKing2, October 19 @ 11:59 PM (2/25)
• landrush registrations — onmove, October 20 @ 8:05 PM (1/19)
• I don't see it... — cambler, October 20 @ 9:05 PM (1/18)
• Please consider this....... — onmove, October 20 @ 9:48 PM (1/17)
• I don't think so — cambler, October 20 @ 9:59 PM (1/16)
• What gives people the right to own the Internet? — rachelmacgregor, October 20 @ 10:20 PM (3/15)
• Agreed! — DaveKing2, October 21 @ 5:52 AM (2/2)
• All common dictionary words shouldn't have been claimable in the Sunrise process at all ... — InternetAdvocate, October 21 @ 11:12 PM (0/0)
• Bruce Springsteen - new TLD — Garry Anderson, October 21 @ 8:42 PM (0/0)
• Good points... — InternetAdvocate, October 20 @ 11:00 PM (0/0)
• Big Business has no right to annex the Internet — rachelmacgregor, October 20 @ 10:54 PM (2/10)
• Re: Big Business has no right to annex the Internet. — InternetAdvocate, October 20 @ 11:46 PM (0/0)
• "The Internet Parliament" to govern ICANN — rachelmacgregor, October 20 @ 11:07 PM (2/8)
• Won't work — cambler, October 20 @ 11:34 PM (0/0)
• Your 'Internet Parliament' idea is dangerous ... — InternetAdvocate, October 20 @ 11:33 PM (1/6)
• Ending ICANN's Autonomy — rachelmacgregor, October 21 @ 12:00 AM (3/5)
• Rebuttals Galore... — InternetAdvocate, October 21 @ 11:27 PM (0/0)
• dubious — richard_henderson, October 21 @ 11:00 AM (0/0)
• If you want some control of ICANN — Garry Anderson, October 21 @ 12:09 AM (1/2)
• Really? — cambler, October 21 @ 12:47 AM (1/1)
• No - I just made it up ;-) — Garry Anderson, October 21 @ 1:36 AM (0/0)
• This is mostly based on Trade Marks... — psbyowner, October 20 @ 6:03 PM (2/4)
• If ICANN is accountable to the US Government, to which office are complaints to be sent? — spot, October 21 @ 2:04 AM (0/0)
• Duh. Precedents. — InternetAdvocate, October 20 @ 10:45 PM (1/2)
• thanks for the correction — psbyowner, October 21 @ 3:50 PM (1/1)
• You're welcome, ... — InternetAdvocate, October 21 @ 10:57 PM (0/0)

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy