View Profile
View Forum Posts
View Forum Threads
View Friends
View Blog Entries
Reply With Quote
of the 966 cases she heard, how did she rule? in favor of the "cybersquatter" or the complantant?
and why isn't she named?
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!Just wanted to let people know that they can read about some concerning statistics I found from analyzing NAF decisions here:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...-88825337.html
The Report itself can be viewed via http://www.DNattorney.com.
I also started a free daily NAF domain name case update via email, so you can receive news about all new NAF cases direct via your email box, similar to what WIPO already does. You can sign up at http://www.DNattorney.com.
Best regards,
Zak
of the 966 cases she heard, how did she rule? in favor of the "cybersquatter" or the complantant?
and why isn't she named?
BobGuzzo.comdomains.
Details are available here:
http://www.dnattorney.com/study.shtml
Hey Zac thanks for your help regarding the phone call.......
My pleasure. Always happy to get calls and emails from DNforum members.
That's scary that those in the top 5 who transfer the most claim are all in the top ten active panelists. Pretty clear that NAF are for-profit, and favor the complainants in order to make more business.
read more about the biased NAF here.
http://citizen.typepad.com/watchdog_...ss-week-l.html
ICANN is so f* up that it allows this to happen.
---------- Post added at 08:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:26 PM ----------
example of NAF's biased decision
http://www.adrforum.com/domains/decisions/96484.htm
Automatic Data Processing is a generic key terms, but Ralph Yachnin, Panelist, ruled that "(the terms) found to be identical to Complatinant’s well-established mark". Who decides whether this mark is well-established? And he gave an example that is totally different i.e. "William Hills Casino". By the way, he is in top ten most active panelists.
Bookmarks