Re: 60 day waiting peroid.

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 9:48 AM -0500 1/9/97, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

> DNRCounsel@aol.com writes:
> > What is to keep an Opposer from filing a challenge with the
> > Registry?  I see nothing in the draft that bars that possibility
>
> Indeed, What is to keep an Opposer from filing a challenge with the
> Church of the Subgenius? I see nothing in the draft that bars that
> possibility.
>
> > and nothing in law that would give the Registry immunity to ignore
> > such an Opposition,
>
> Being more serious here for a moment, there is no reason you couldn't
> get a court order enjoining the registration of a name. However, you
> are speaking "filing a challenge with the Registry", and presumably
> that just means "sending a note". There is nothing in the law that
> says if you simply send a letter to someone saying "don't do this"
> they are required to listen to the letter. Sure, a registry or
> registrar has no "immunity" from such a letter -- but since such a
> letter isn't binding why would it matter?
>
> The document makes it clear that registries and registrars are
> expected to not take discretionary actions with respect to
> registrations -- they listen to the courts, and they listen to the
> holder of the registration, but they politely ignore all else. They
> need no "immunity" here to ignore anyone but the courts or the holders
> of registrations -- no one is required to listen to anyone but the
> courts in the first place.
>

That's flawed logic. What the IAHC has done in the draft is provide a
mechanism for the legal industry to control the delegation of
registrations. Every law firm will monitor the publication data and
automatically issue challenges for the remotest similarity to an
existing name. Thus there will be an artificial filter placed on the
availability of domain names. The majority of popular domain names will
be immediately unusable for a long period of time, since they'll be
tied up in the dispute mechanism. Once the domain names are issued,
does the case law now exists apply to all the other registries?

Another thing that you haven't defined in the charter is what happens
after a challenge is issued. How is the eventual delegation arrived at?
"Leaving it up to the courts" is a particularly useless reply. That
happens already. What is the registry/registrar procedure for dealing
with this through to the eventual delegation?

> > Wouldn't the Registries, under the IAHC draft, now be forced to
> > enter into the merits of the disputes from the earliest days of
> > registration - a part far earlier than even NSI dares to enter now?
>
> I don't see how you could draw such a conclusion. If anything, the
> registries are less involved, as in the first 60 days they haven't
> even taken any action you *could* enjoin, since all they've done is
> publish "there is an intent at the end of 60 days to register this
> name", and that in and of itself isn't even remotely actionable.
>

If the registry takes any action based upon any challenge it becomes
involved. That includes any non-court sanctioned action, such as
retaining the domain on hold after the 60 days because a challenge has
been issued.



Regards,

Simon

--
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.