I would be interesting to see how much force it would take for Auda's eligibility and allocation policy to be bent to specifically suit this case. Maybe a new policy or interpratation? Maybe a but if this.. but if that... but.. Brad ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Keegel" <djk§cybersource.com.au> To: <dns§dotau.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 11:02 AM Subject: Re: [DNS] auDRP interesting situation > ] Quoting Craig Oehlers on Wednesday May 19, 2004: > ] | > ] | 1. The complaintant is planning to have bt.com.au deleted altogether > ] | and become unavailable by any applicant; > ] | 2. The complaintant is under the impression auDA will sacrifice the > ] | integrity of the auDA policy under the weight of probably a very large > ] | company; or > ] | 3. The complaintant is making the complaint without understanding auDA > ] | allocation and eligibility policy > ] | > ] | Any thoughts on this situation? > ] > ] I would have to say 1 or 3. You are correct that if they succeed, the > ] domain in question should effectively be locked up, as it is no longer > ] grandfathered. #1 could be possible if they want to stop people going to > ] it for confusions sake. > > I would agree with Kim here. > > ] I am not sure whoever the complainant is, but I doubt they can asset > ] they have sole rights to "BT". Both Bankers Trust and British Telecom > ] spring to mind when I hear BT. > > The concept of "sole rights" does not arise for auDRP. > Basically the complainant needs to prove that they have rights to the > name and that the respondent does not have any right to the name. > (And bad faith by the respondent.) > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > David Keegel <djk§cybersource.com.au> http://www.cyber.com.au/users/djk/ > Cybersource P/L: Linux/Unix Systems Administration Consulting/Contracting > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/ > Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the > author, further information at the above URL. > > >Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:07 UTC