RE: Re[2]: [ga] WIPO Arbitrators Stern In Domain 'Hijacking' Rulings

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: owner-ga-full@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga-full@dnso.org]On Behalf Of
|> William X Walsh
|> Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 9:52 AM
|> To: Roeland Meyer
|> Cc: General Assembly of the DNSO
|> Subject: Re[2]: [ga] WIPO Arbitrators Stern In Domain 'Hijacking'
|> Rulings
|>
|>
|> Friday, Friday, October 26, 2001, 4:21:01 PM, Roeland Meyer wrote:
|>
|> > Cute ... so what's the penalty?
|>
|> Exactly. There should be a monetary penalty for reverse hijacking
|> decisions, in compensation to the domain owner.  A punitive like
|> penalty, that they must agree to pay if they are found to be engaging
|> in a reverse hijacking attempt as a condition of being permitted to
|> initiate a UDRP action.
|>
|> What do the rest of you think of this concept?

Wouldnt' the domain name holder be able to take civil action to recover
costs and any compensation they believe they were entitled to?

I'm not against the concept, just wonder how much legal authority do we want
to invest with ICANN and the UDRP process.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

--
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