<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[nc-udrp] conference call feedback
Great conference call on Tuesday, Marilyn. I think you did an excellent
job of getting things on
the table for discussion.
I just wanted to be sure two things got nailed down.
1) there is no reason we have to live in uncertainty re: the date a
domain goes dark after an expiry date. Right now there is no policy.
If we are architecting how we think things should work,
then we should be able to say there is a policy: the plug gets pulled
'x' days
and I think x should be zero. As someone pointed out,
the main way people who neglect to pay for their domain get their
act in gear is when the domain goes dark. So instead of having
variability in the date it should be part of the registrar agreement,
that you can not leave a domain expired and still in the file.
2) For any grace or redemption or other wait period we should keep it
simple and not try to differentiate between different kinds of names,
used/unused, infringing/innocent, safe/porn, etc etc. A name is a
name.
While it may help a few 'obvious' cases make it back into
circulation, the headaches
this might cause far outweigh the minor commercial benefit of having
one or two obvious
cases get back in the pool early.
ok... make it three things.
3) For these various waiting 'periods' lets just find a number or
numbers that work(s)
for the greatest good and not try to worry about the the bad things
that
happen to a few examples. There will be horror stories and freak
instances no matter what we do. lets just do the regular 'whats good
policy?' thing and do something that works for most, is not overly
onerous to implement, and explicity state that we know its not
perfect
but the best we think we can do.
Dan Steinberg
SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec fax: (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|