RE: [registrars] WLS - VOTING - Objection

["Rob Hall" <rob@momentous.ca>]

Rick,

I agree with Tim.  There should be no public viewing of the information.
The WLS makes no "Claim" towards the IP of the Registrant.  We don't want to
create a situation where we need a UDRP for WLS, or people start suing each
other over taking a WLS subscription.

To date, there have been a few ways that people "backordered" domains, be it
through an auction style or simple backorder.  To my knowledge, none of them
gave out the current position holders information.  IP rights are only
granted to the WLS holder, IF the domain is deleted and they become the
Registrant.

As for why someone would want AOL.com, it could be for many reasons, none of
which interfere with the trademark AOL has on their name.  Suppose an
organization such as  the "American Obstetrics League" wanted it.  (ok ...
its a corny example, but the only O word I could think of that fit).
Arguably, they would have a right to it if they had a trademark of AOL for
their organization in their area.

But I don't want to go to far down the legal argument here.  That is best
left for others (ie: lawyers!).  I can see no advantage in giving out the
information publically, other than to allow current Registrants to get
upset.

Rob.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Rick Wesson
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 12:22 PM
To: Tim Ruiz
Cc: registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars] WLS - VOTING - Objection


On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Tim Ruiz wrote:

> And I'm not suggesting that the personal information of the WLS holder not
> be gathered. Just that it not be publicly available. VeriSign or ICANN can
> use it to evaluate the WLS success, or lack of it, or whatever. I would
just
> hate to see a repeat of the privacy fiasco that the port 43 Whois program
> has become.


look, we don't know what will happen... what we do know is that there will
be confusion and my customers that own IPR require that they know when
somone has a claim on their property, and the can identify the entity
involved, if the information is not public we have larger problems.

as for privacy, its illusion, is the only thing vanising.

-rick