Re: Thread 2: 60-day issue

[Karl Denninger <karl@Mcs.Net>]

> [It seems I misunderstood Mr. Denninger, for which I apologize]

That's ok.

> >That's obviously not the intent nor how I'd go at this.
> >
> >What says that CONTESTING the name causes instant revocation?
> >
> >No.  You need an injunction to get the name yanked during the 60 day
> >interval.  Just like in REAL LIFE if you want to stop someone from operating
> >a business down the street with a name you believe is infringing.
> 
> >That's why we have COURTS Carl.
> 
> So under your proposal, what is different about the time before and after
> the 60-day period ends?  It seems that someone with a gripe can sue before
> or after that date.  And it seems that the domain name is active before and
> after that date.  So what is the significance of that date, under your
> proposal?

The same as it is under yours.

It creates a presumption of negligence on the part of the contestor.

Nothing prevents you from suing if you believe actual dilution is taking
place.  However, if you're trying to "steal" a domain name away when there
is no dilution occurring under the law, and you had constructive notice in a
public place of the registration but IGNORED IT, then you have some
explaining to do to the judge.

--
-- 
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl     | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
			     | 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info@mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
Fax:   [+1 312 248-9865]     | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal