Re: [gnso-rap-dt] Registration vs. Use / Scope Issues

[Roland Perry <roland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In message 
<716d09d70905281916q347cef35x952bc7da6ed389ea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, at 
22:16:33 on Thu, 28 May 2009, George Kirikos <icann+rap@xxxxxxxx> writes
> "However, the fact that the disputed domain name was registered before
> Complainant had trademark rights in the FULL TERM mark precludes a
> finding of bad faith under Policy 4(a)(iii)."
[etc]

This covers the issue of reverse-hijacking in the Trademark space.

But TM issues are not the *only* form of abuse we are considering.

(In fact, we have barely started the process of considering the document 
which lists various candidates.)
Let me try to broaden the discussion with an example where the public 
might rely upon the registration of a domain name (and would therefore 
likely suffer a loss if the basis for the registration became invalid).
A hypothetical gtld .bank, for organisations which have an appropriate 
licence from their financial regulator. The Bank of Roland has such a 
licence, and registers roland.bank, but some months later is "struck 
off" by the regulator as the result of some misbehaviour. The BoR does 
not cancel the domain registration (as would be required by that 
registry's T&C).
Does the failure to cancel the domain amount to registration abuse?

Would it be mitigating circumstances if they removed their website and 
arranged for emails to bounce (ie didn't *use* the registration) but 
nevertheless still insisted not to cancel the registration.
--
Roland Perry