Re: [ga] Transfer Protocol Perjury Stipulation

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Roeland and all,

  Indeed it does seem that LLNL or Lawrence livermore National
Labs personnel had or have a english comprehension problem,
euphemistically known as a Reading Impairment.  BTW, isn't
LLNL where Kent Crispin works?  :(

Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:

> Yes, and don't forget the constant redefinition of English; "That
> depands on what the meaning of 'is' is.", indeed!
>
> Some of us seem to be taking direction from that as well. No wonder LLNL
> has trouble.They can't even read a security directive straight.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Rex
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 1999 2:19 AM
> > To: Nigel Roberts
> > Cc: ga@dnso.org
> > Subject: Re: [ga] Transfer Protocol Perjury Stipulation
> >
> >
> > Remember Nigel,
> >   Here in the US our president redefines the word "perjury" as he goes
> > along.
> >
> > It seems to be catching on.
> >
> > Rex
> >
> >
> >
> > Nigel Roberts wrote:
> > >
> > > This also completely ignores the differences in legal systems around
> > > the world.
> > >
> > > More North American-centric spin in my opinion.
> > >
> > > In the UK, perjury is lying to a court, or making
> > > a knowingly untrue statement in something like
> > > a Statutory Declaration (made before a Justice
> > > of the Peace -- an unpaid magistrate -- or solicitor).
> > >
> > > Telling lies in a contract application form is a tort and
> > > actionble in the civil courts (unless it is for credit in
> > > which case it is the criminal offence of obtaining pecuniary
> > > advantage by deception)
> > >
> > > So let's be sure here, are they implying that each domain
> > applicant in
> > > the UK will now have to make a Stat. Dec. (cost between $10 -$50)???
> > >
> > > Nigel Roberts
> > > nigel@roberts.co.uk
> > >
> > > d3nnis wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Today's teleconference included a slightly scarey
> > discussion regarding the advisability of
> > > > clamping down on domain name registrants who flee to a
> > new registrar to escape  a
> > > > pending dispute or cease and desist letter.    The option
> > of requiring registrant hoppers to
> > > > sign a statement declaring themselves free of such
> > baggage was given some very sharp teeth:
> > > > the penalty of perjury.
> > > >
> > > > As an individual domain name owner I noticed acutely the
> > absence of any spokesperson for my
> > > > perspective on this issue.   So I include it here.
> > > >
> > > > The problem is one of balance.  If you require
> > individuals to submit to a serious legal
> > > > penalties for statements made relative to a trademark
> > dispute, you should make an equal
> > > > requirement on the trademark holder.   In all fairness,
> > the presumption that an individual will lie
> > > > should be no greater than the presumption that a large
> > company will file a frivolous
> > > > complaint with no basis in trademark infringement.
> > > >
> > > > I am not proposing a specific penalty that would be
> > appropriate for a trademark holder
> > > > who files a complaint without substance ...  just
> > observing that the same salubrious effects achieved
> > > > by applying penalties to individuals might well be
> > accomplished with respect to companies -- a reduction
> > > > in complaints.
> > > >
> > > > Dennis Schaefer
> >
> > --
> >

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208