View Profile
View Forum Posts
View Forum Threads
View Friends
View Blog Entries
Reply With QuoteDotComCloun, if you don't like anything, get lost. I think no one is going to miss you here.
If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the largest domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 105,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.
Register Today on DNForum IT'S FREE!
Well ... there were actually precedent cases that owners and office bearers of common carriers such as forums were held liable to content they deliver. As a moderator, I of course don't want to see anything close to that happens.
YES. AND EVEN IF YOU WOULD LIKELY WIN, DO YOU WANT TO DROP $50,000+ ON LAWYERS TO BE FOUND.. NOT LIABLE?
Back to the topic: my take is that we can look at this issue from two perspectives, legal and ethical.
I WOULD JUST TACKLE THE LEGAL ASPECT WHICH IS THE ONLY THING YOU CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT.
I agree that it would be difficult to summarily judge whether a domain name is cybersquatting or not
NO IT'S NOT. IS THERE REALLY DOUBT THAT SEADOOS.COM, DISNY.COM, MICRASOFT.COM, AND OTHER FAMOUS DISTINCTIVE REGISTERED TRADEMARKS WHICH ARE ROUTINELY OFFERED HERE ARE *NOT* CASES OF CYBERSQUATTING?
WOULD YOU BET THE FARM ON GETTING A JUDGE TO BUY THAT IN FEDERAL COURT?
(that's why we need the courts or UDRP arbitration); but it would be safe to disallow sales of domain names against which disputes have been formally filed, not to mention those that already come with unfavorable ruling, in order to safeguard both this forum and its members (who are potential buyers) from future legal cosequences.
SORRY, BUT THAT IS SIMPLY ABSURD. SEE BELOW.
On the other hand, it is not particularly ethical to KNOWINGLY sell a domain name that has UDRP or legal complications. It may not be criminal (which actually depends on respective jurisdiction) or immoral (which then depends on individual conviction) but probably falls outside good business practice or professional codes. And as part of the industry, we shouldn't encourage that at all, to say the least.
IT IS COMPLETELY MOOT. NO ONE CAN TRANSFER A NAME THAT IS SUBJECT TO A UDRP DISPUTE! THE REGISTRARS AUTOMATICALLY LOCK DOWN THE NAME AS PART OF THE UDRP PROCEDURE. SO IT CAN'T BE SOLD/ TRANSFERRED ANYWAY. IT IS MOOT.
SO --IF THIS IS THE OFFICIAL LINE-- IT IS VERY DISCOURAGING.
IT LOOKS LIKE A GREEN LIGHT FOR BUSINESS AS USUAL..
:(
Last edited by DaddyHalbucks; 08-19-2003 at 05:27 AM.
DotComCloun, if you don't like anything, get lost. I think no one is going to miss you here.
IT LOOKS LIKE A GREEN LIGHT FOR BUSINESS AS USUAL..
++++++++
AKA: Failed leadership.
:clown:Originally posted by DotComCowboy
IT LOOKS LIKE A GREEN LIGHT FOR BUSINESS AS USUAL..
++++++++
AKA: Failed leadership.
===============================
WebsPassage Directory - PR5 - $2 per listing
===============================
:clown:Originally posted by DotComCowboy
IT LOOKS LIKE A GREEN LIGHT FOR BUSINESS AS USUAL..
++++++++
AKA: Failed leadership.
http://dotcomcowboy.com
©1999-03 All rights reserved.
DotComCowboy is a trademark.
BOOKMARK THIS PAGE NOW!
DotComCowboy doesn't show up on uspto.gov neither DotComCloun does.
So, stop bullshitting people.
Thank you.
Last edited by DomainNameBroker.com; 08-26-2003 at 01:19 AM.
I never claimed it was a REGISTERED trademark --I only claim COMMON LAW trademark rights.
... you sound like those you have tried to prey on ...but that's different, right Hal?Originally posted by DotComCowboy
I never claimed it was a REGISTERED trademark --I only claim COMMON LAW trademark rights.
Shaun
Next projects: Torontojobs.com and Jobs.ca
:clown:
i thought this thread died?
===============================
WebsPassage Directory - PR5 - $2 per listing
===============================
"On the other hand, it is not particularly ethical to KNOWINGLY sell a domain name that has UDRP or legal complications. It may not be criminal (which actually depends on respective jurisdiction) or immoral (which then depends on individual conviction) but probably falls outside good business practice or professional codes. "
Then why does the UDRP expressly permit domain name transfers during a live UDRP proceeding (as long as the transferee agrees to be bound by the outcome)
8. Transfers During a Dispute.
a. Transfers of a Domain Name to a New Holder.
You may not transfer your domain name registration to another holder (i) during a pending administrative proceeding brought pursuant to Paragraph 4 or for a period of fifteen (15) business days (as observed in the location of our principal place of business) after such proceeding is concluded; or (ii) during a pending court proceeding or arbitration commenced regarding your domain name unless the party to whom the domain name registration is being transferred agrees, in writing, to be bound by the decision of the court or arbitrator. We reserve the right to cancel any transfer of a domain name registration to another holder that is made in violation of this subparagraph.
John Berryhill Ph.d., esq.
John-AT-johnberryhill.com
Please do not send private messages via dnforum.com, email me directly.
... you sound like those you have tried to prey on ...but that's different, right Hal?
++++++++++++
Yes, it is different.
"DotComCowboy" is highly distinctive, and there is only one person in the world using it, to the best of my knowledge --me.
A dozen or more organizations around the world do business and use the acronyms in my contested generic acronym domains.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks