RE: [ga] WHOIS accuracy, and name deletions

["Rodrigo Orenday Serrato" <rorenday@banxico.org.mx>]

O.K., just one thing first: I was not the author of the second paragraph;
that was a reply from someone else to my posting.

As for your comment, although duplicating the full legal apparatus for the
service of process of  the judiciary in the UDRP is not only not practical,
but perhaps even impossible altogether at many levels, I think many people
would agree that it is desirable to add as many such sureties as possible.

I mean, for example, that there are great differences in the service of
process throughout the world (eg. in Mexico service of process is only valid
and binding if performed by a Court officer using certified documents and
drafting a certified deed thereof, whereas, as I understand, in the USA
practically anyone can serve process upon the defendant by just handing him
a copy of the suit and providing the Court with evidence of the moment of
service) which may not be fully addressed.

Nevertheless I agree with comments in the sense that a printout of an email
allegedly sent to the registration contact, which may sit in his inbox for a
period of time without being read, is not sufficient evidence that said
contact has had knowledge of the email's content.

Here's a thought I just came up with. If you've registered a domain name and
you actively use it for your website, and you have a number of pages in sai
website, perhaps it wouldn't be too much trouble to include one wherein
someone suing you as per the UDRP could serve the process on you and obtain
proof of service thereof.

Maybe countries, such as Spain, that have legislated on information society
services could require domain name registrants to include one such page in
their websites, as anyone who has a website comes under the rule of such
statutes. However I can not as yet tell if that would be desirable.

Atentamente, Regards
Rodrigo Orenday Serratos


-----Mensaje original-----
De: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]En nombre de
kent@songbird.com
Enviado el: Jueves, 09 de Enero de 2003 12:23 PM
Para: ga@dnso.org
Asunto: Re: [ga] WHOIS accuracy, and name deletions


On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 04:27:37PM -0800, George Kirikos wrote:
> Hello,
>
> --- Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato <rorenday@banxico.org.mx> wrote:
> > 15 days seems more than fair a period prior deletion.
> >
> > I don't know how it is elsewhere, but in Mexico one has 9 working
> > days to
> > reply to a law suit, period after which you would find yourself in
> > default
>
> The big difference, though, is that the clock begins in real court once
> you are *served* the legal process. Process servers often try multiple
> times to reach a defendant. An email sitting on a server somewhere that
> hasn't been read doesn't constitutive being served in any jurisdiction
> I know of. Can you *prove* that a standard email notification was
> actually read??

So you think that the UDRP should duplicate the full legal aparatus of
serving process?

Kent
--
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

--
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