<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] Re: [ga-udrp] the UDRP
- To: ga@dnso.org
- Subject: [ga] Re: [ga-udrp] the UDRP
- From: Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:39:21 +0200
- In-Reply-To: <03f601c0f584$bab9c980$dd4ffea9@rader>
- References: <006d01c0f560$af3f4a40$bc128ed1@NameCritic><3B29A9A2.2E681701@hi-tek.com>
- Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
Dear Ross,
This would certainly be of real interest, as the rights/risks of the IDNHs
have not been worked in cooperation with a Registrar and there is room for
an insurance solution against errors/bugs as the one quoted or similars (on
the Registrar as well as on the Holder side).
Jefsey
On 12:19 15/06/01, Ross Wm. Rader said:
> > That would be registrars can decide what ever they want. I cannot
> > figure who you protect by not publishing the full name. There is only
> > one reasonable explanation for this type of situation.
>
>I can't speak for all other registrars, but Tucows leeway on matters like
>this are very limited and certainly not the equivalent of "whatever we
>want".
>
>If anyone is interested in facts, I can probably get Karen to work up a list
>of exactly what our leeway is.
>
>Let me know.
>
>-rwr
>
>--
>This message was passed to you via the ga-udrp@dnso.org list.
>Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga-udrp" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|