Lol I doubt you could anything accept change your last nameEven if your name was Harry Wanker. Can't imagine how many of those there are lol
Originally Posted by RADiSTAR
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!What if you had a last name of Wanker :-D
Lol I doubt you could anything accept change your last nameEven if your name was Harry Wanker. Can't imagine how many of those there are lol
Originally Posted by RADiSTAR
Actually there is a John Wanker in my local white pages.
by that post, basically, you have nothing to worry about.
Seek... And you shall Find
PM sent Seeker :-D
Thanks for that case link, John!
Shucks, gayfocker.com is taken (from Gaylord Focker of Meet the Parents).![]()
Vidi, Vici, Veni!
Oh, you want this case:I wonder what happens if a person with an obscene (but real) last name tries to get hold of a domain by that name, which contains adult material
http://www.arb-forum.com/domains/decisions/94989.htm
(dickmasters.net)
The case is somewhat cryptic, but the name of the Complainant speaks volumes:
Lawrence Dick McGee aka Dick Masters v. AAdvanced Website Technologies
John Berryhill Ph.d., esq.
John-AT-johnberryhill.com
Please do not send private messages via dnforum.com, email me directly.
Well that's just as shocking as Bush's victory...
I mean come on...a guy uses the monicker - not even real name - Dickmaster, and gets the domain?
So if I start doing business using the pseudonym Alexander The Great can I claim that .com ?
That's really messed up.
Originally Posted by RADiSTAR
Can? Yes.Originally Posted by RADiSTAR
Will? Maybe, maybe not. :-D
Based on that link, what practically clinched it for the Complainant was that
agreement made between him and the Respondent prior to the UDRP case,
and the "proof" submitted to substantiate that agreement.
Can't argue with that...
Last edited by davezan1; 11-03-2004 at 04:17 PM.
Vidi, Vici, Veni!
Bookmarks