RE: [ga] UDRP Questionnaire

["Hugh Blair" <hblair@bigfoot.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> On Behalf Of Sandy Harris
<snip>
>
> What I meant in the second was that the burden of proof must be on the
> complainant.

Yes. +1

> I think there are two stages to this. First the compainant has to
demonstrate
> the existence of a conflict in something like trademark law. The question
of
> 'bad faith' does not even arise unless there's a clear conflict.
>
> I'd also like to see three possible outcomes from a UDRP ruling.
>
> Complaint denied, and the complainant is going to have a hard time going
to
> court since he agreed that the UDRP procedure was binding.
>
> Complaint accepted and (former) domain name holder is going to ...
>
> No ruling. The complainant appears to have at least enough of a case to
> argue about, but it is not clear enough for UDRP to summarily rule on.
> Take it to court or drop it.

As long as there is a time limit to option #s 1 & 3. Open ended waiting
would serve no one.  Maybe 30 days after both parties have submitted
their complaint/response?

-Hugh

--
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