RE: [registrars] Pattent on email changer and whois lookup

["Donny Simonton" <donny@intercosmos.com>]

Rob,
I think their idea is about as enforceable as paying Unisys for using a
gif image.  So will this technology use the gif technology?  Will you be
paying Unisys for their patent?

Why aren't you currently using this patent pending 'alias email' on
namescout right now?  Looks to me like normal text on a whois query.

Donny



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org] On
> Behalf Of Jim Archer
> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 4:06 PM
> To: Rick Wesson
> Cc: Registrars Mail List
> Subject: [registrars] Pattent on email changer and whois lookup
> 
> Hi Rick...
> 
> When you find that prior art, would you please share it with the list?
I
> can think of a few registrars that are going to be in court fighting
this
> pattent if NameScout tries to enforce it.
> 
> Jim
> 
> --On Monday, June 03, 2002 11:57 AM -0700 Rick Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >
> > Applied for the pattent? I'll be digging up all my prior art, I
think I
> > even posted the methodology to the IETF lists as an Internet Draft,
the
> > Registrars list and I think its in at least one of the old gTLD
bids.
> >
> > don't pattent processes that there are lots of prior art for.
> >
> > -rick
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Rob Hall wrote:
> >
> >> Paul,
> >>
> >> It is us that is doing it ... we call it "alias email", and we have
> >> applied for a patent on the process.  We would welcome discussion
with
> >> any registrar who wishes to license this from us.
> >>
> >>
> >> Rob.
> >> Namescout.com
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org
[mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> >> Behalf Of Paul Stahura
> >> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 2:19 PM
> >> To: Registrars@Dnso. Org
> >> Subject: RE: [registrars] whois lookup
> >>
> >>
> >> Just like with illegal drugs, there is the supply-side and the
> >> demand-side. What Ken is talking about below is the demand-side.
> >> He makes valid point that I happen to agree with.
> >>
> >> An additional way of limiting the abuse is on the supply-side.
> >> We are contemplating implementing an "whois-email-address-changer"
> >> service whereby the email addresses in eNom's port-43 output
> >> will be dynamic.  I forget which other registrar is already doing
this
> >> (or soimething similar) (please tell me if you know which one)
> >> This service will change the outputted email addresses to something
> like:
> >>
"thisaddrwillexpirein24hours.code1234567890@whoisemailforwarder.com"
> >> all email sent to this address will be forwarded to the real
address.
> >> These addresses will be valid for a period of time
> >> (like 24 hours, or a week) at which time it will never be used
again.
> >> This gives registrars enough time to send xfer notices (or whatever
> >> "good" purposes we use the info for), yet
> >> would then invalidate any abuser's scrapped whois information
> >> every 24-hours.
> >> The real addresses will still be publically available in our
web-based
> >> whois,
> >> just like it is now.  (email addrs are outputted as a gif images
there
> >> which is harder to grab/parse, since you need OCR to do so).
> >>
> >> Comments?
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Ken Stubbs [mailto:kstubbs@digitel.net]
> >> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 5:29 AM
> >> To: Ross Wm. Rader; Registrars@Dnso. Org
> >> Subject: Re: [registrars] whois lookup
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I would assume that this kind of behavior I described  would affect
ALL
> >> registrar's image and would be sanctioned under any proposed
registrar
> >> "code of conduct" .
> >>
> >> improper registrar actions towards outside parties (be they their
own
> >> customers, other registrars customers or registries) can influence
> >> outsiders views of our "constituents" and that is of paramount
concern
> >> to me.
> >>
> >> I am frankly tired of people using  the improper actions of a few
> >> registrars to "paint" all registrars.
> >>
> >> if we want to have future creditability for our constituency, then
we
> >> need to be willing to "step up to the plate" and deal difficult
issues
> >> like this which affect our respective business image..
> >>
> >> any registrar who uses improper & unethical  business practices to
> >> "advantage" themselves in the marketplace needs to be "strongly
> >> sanctioned" and the issues I raise most definitely fall within this
> area.
> >>
> >> ken stubbs
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>
> >> To: "Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@digitel.net>; "Bhavin Turakhia"
> >> <bhavin.t@directi.com>; "Registrars@Dnso. Org"
<registrars@dnso.org>
> >> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 8:00 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [registrars] whois lookup
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > how do you suggest we deal with registrars who intentionally
data
> >> > > mine
> >> the
> >> > > "thick registries "
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > ken stubbs
> >> >
> >> > That's a problem for the registries to deal with. Let us instead
> >> > concern ourselves with data mining of registrars under the thin
> >> > model...each of us are directly effected...
> >> >
> >> > -rwr
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> 
> 
> 
> *****************************
> Jim Archer, CEO
> Registration Technologies, Inc.
> 10 Crestview Drive
> Greenville, RI 02828
> voice: 401-949-4768
> fax: 401-949-5814
> jarcher@RegistrationTek.com
> http://www.RegistrationTek.com
>