Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	Watchman
Date/Time:	Fri, February 22, 2002 at 2:54 PM GMT
Browser:	Microsoft Internet Explorer V6.0 using Windows NT 5.0
Score:	5
Subject:	Possible.  But you are wrong: victoria.info is valid
Message:
Some squatters will get away with it. On the other hand, the example you use is not a good one.  vistoria.info was claimed by Conagra, a big food conglomerate.  In the Afilias shadow database, they provided their trademark number.  And sure enough, if you check the US trademark database, that's a good registration for "Victoria", owned by one of Conagra's subsidiaries.  If victoria.info got challenged, Conagra would win. Just goes to prove that the situation's more complicated than it appears.
Link:	Afilias shadow database

Message Thread:

• many fraudsters will be able to keep their names — Cation, February 21 @ 8:09 PM (2/7)
• Official Afilias Challenge Task Force Response — Challenge-Afilias, February 22 @ 9:19 PM (2/4)
• Hi Challenge@Afilias.info — DomeBase, February 23 @ 6:09 PM (1/1)
• Don't get your hopes up — RichMull, February 23 @ 11:14 PM (0/0)
• Yesnic smells extremely fishy, but I can't read or access Korean tms — moler, February 23 @ 8:01 AM (1/1)
• Mole, they lost some .info Sunrise Challenge cases...says it all !!! (eom) — EasyTech2, February 24 @ 4:08 PM (0/0)
• Possible.  But you are wrong: victoria.info is valid — Watchman, February 22 @ 2:54 PM (1/1)
• On what planet is it the year 0197-01-01? — RichMull, February 22 @ 10:50 PM (0/0)

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy