Re: [wg-review] The Number 2 Problem (solution)

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 00:45:24 +0800, Bret Busby wrote:

>Now, the domain name www.teardropstissues.com , is registered (from the
>whois gateway), to the company named www.we-ransom-domain-names.com (an
>arbitrary name, used here, also as an example, with no relationship to
>anything, living or dead, ...). The registrar is fully aware, in the
>cuircumstances, that the registrar is selling the domain name, to a
>domain name pirate, and, that the pirate is obtaining the domain name,
>solely for holding it for ransom.
>
>Is the registrar not to be held responsible for its conduct, in being a
>knowing accessory to the piracy?

While sympathetic to your problems my answer is definitely no, and
case law has backed this up.  Registrars deal with thousands and
thousands of name applications and use generally fully automated
systems.  It would introduce great cost to millions of people and
large delays if registrars had to check (God knows how) that someone
applying for a name has the best entitlement to it of everyone who may
apply.

>If an arms dealer in the USA, sells nuclear warheads, to the known to
>be, psychotic, dictator, of the polically unstable country, of Lunacy,
>in the middle of the Pacific, which country, and, dictator, have a sworn
>policy of launching a full-scale nuclear war on the USA, and, knowing
>that the sale is against the laws banning sale of weapons, or, any
>device that may be used in a miltary way, to that country, isn't the
>arms dealer to be held responsible for the sale of the nuclear warheads,
>to that country?

Analogy not at all valid.  A domain name is just a name - it is not a
nuclear weapon.  Also the no of nukes sold each year is small compared
to the number of domains registered.

>Similarly, I say that a domain name registrar should be held legally
>responsible for its actions, when the registrar knows full well, what it
>is doing, is wrong.

I contend the Registrar should operate on a first in first served
basis, otherwise you introduce subjectivity in which can be even more
unfair.  If someone is cyber squatting then either sue them or UDRP
them!  Or just use a similar name.  Or register the name under the
soon to be public *.biz?

I've also just realised that this is getting very off topic for this
working group.  The nature of your grievances are better for the
general assembly list.

DPF
________________________________________________________________________
<david at farrar dot com>
NZ Usenet FAQs - http://www.dpf.ac.nz/usenet/nz
ICQ 29964527
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html