Ben Edelman - what an ***hole.
Interesting. But I'm not trained in law as yet, so I couldn't competently rigorously discuss questions of constitutionality.Originally posted by mike
1. How about a study on the constitutionality of the 'Bad Faith Clause' of the UDRP?
Most of us think it blatently favors corporate interests while stomping on Americans right to pursue happiness thru free commerce by painting all domain owners that don't have deep enough pockets to develop their domains as cybersquatters.
Here again, I don't have any particular expertise to bring to bear on this question.
2. Or a study on what term should be applied to the TM lobby who insidiously undermines and stifles free enterprise on the net at every turn by labeling legitimate domain owners as cybersquatters along with real cybersquatters?
Trademark Thugs (TM thugs) and Trademark Terrorists (TM terrorists) are my current favorites.
This is certainly an important topic. Can you point me to any existing reference or discussions on this specific subject? To document this in the way I most favor, I'll need to be able to produce a large number of examples of precisely this -- a few registrants scooping up many desirable domains by using their positions as registrars. I'd be interested in doing such a study & reporting the results -- and will certainly appreciate & investigate your suggestions along these lines.
3. Or how about a study on the legitimacy of how so few get so many expiring domains by using their positions as registrars, etc.
Originally posted by beatz
I just don't get it why someone spends so much time on investigating how many domains may not comply with a certain part of policy AND LISTING THOSE DOMAINS.
I mean - even if those domains should not comply with the registry policy - what the hell do you want?!
Sue the domain owners?
Force them to delete the names?!
Why?!
Originally posted by thewitt
As with any research, your conclusions will be found acceptable by some, and unacceptable by others. I did not agree with the implications of your Fortune 500 paper at all - and having been responsible for registering a significant number of domains as a Fortune 500 company, I can tell you why we used Verisign - there were no other registrars. Why does my old company stay with Verisign? Because it's less work for them than changing registrars.
Originally posted by bedelman
This is certainly an important topic. Can you point me to any existing reference or discussions on this specific subject? To document this in the way I most favor, I'll need to be able to produce a large number of examples of precisely this -- a few registrants scooping up many desirable domains by using their positions as registrars. I'd be interested in doing such a study & reporting the results -- and will certainly appreciate & investigate your suggestions along these lines.
Originally posted by timechange
Too much ado about nothing, mike. Free enterprise shall prevail. The rest is - again - pure BS. Whether you like it or not, porn will continue to rule the Internet and to provide a substantial cashflow to the .Net era. The academic approach that some have decided to take might as well stay within the academia environment. Show me the money!
Originally posted by mike
Sure Ben, I can point you to two existing reference points on this subject.
The first would be BuyDomains.com, an ICANN registrar. They have accumulated somewhere around 100,000 domains now Ben, a large percentage from drops. They scoop them up for themselves and register alot of the most valuable names under the name 'Rare Names.'
The second entity I would investigate is Ultimate Search. I don't know how many names they have but it certainly is in the tens of thousands. They seem to have access to expired names beore anyone else does. There is something 'fishy' with them too.
Go get em tiger!
*the exceptional businesses of our esteemed moderators