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
|> Patrick Greenwell
|> Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 10:38 AM
|> To: William X Walsh
|> Cc: Roeland Meyer; General Assembly of the DNSO
|> Subject: Re[2]: [ga] WIPO Arbitrators Stern In Domain 'Hijacking'
|> Rulings

|> I think it's a potentially interesting idea, but I find it unlikely that
|> you'll ever get "consensus"(aka the ICANN staff and BOD) to buy into it.
|> There's also a pretty significant enforcement issue. How would
|> you propose to enforce judgements?

Perhaps the easiest way would have it as part of the initial UDRP agreement
and as a fixed amount per claim.  Say the same as the fee for the UDRP
action.  It could become a refundable portion of the fee charged for
instance.  I can only see this getting off the ground if there was a set
penalty for each instance and not as a judgementally defined amount for each
case.

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