Re: [nc-udrp] Fw: <bloombert.com> Domain Name Dispute]

["John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <john@johnberryhill.com>]

As Mr. Evans mentioned, the Deletes Task Force has taken up this precise
subject, and is considering dealing with this issue from the standpoint of
registrar delete procedures.  It would probably be unwise to have two Task
Forces developing independent solutions to this perceived problem, as the
solutions then generated would result in conflicting registrar obligations.

The UDRP is a provision of a domain registration contract, and is a set of
contract terms binding on the registrant.  It is not at all clear how one can
(a) force the registrant to renew a domain name when the contract term has
expired or (b) force the registrar to have to pay for continued registration
of a domain name simply because someone has filed a dispute and has not yet
proven entitlement to the domain name.

It has been noted in the Deletes Task Force correspondence that a domain name
registrant who has decided to abandon a domain name rather than to engage in
a dispute is entitled to the contractual expectation that the domain name
registration contract will expire on the date which the registrant contracted
for the domain name to expire.

At least one registrar notifies both parties to a dispute if the domain name
is about to expire, and provides either side with the opportunity to pay the
renewal fee.  Quite frankly, if a complainant is unable to read a calendar to
ascertain that fact independently, then there is little that is likely to
help save such a complainant from its own incompetence.


> This would appear to be a reasonable request
>
> Tony Harris

> >  I know this issue is being reviewed by the deletes Task Force.
> >
> > J. Scott Evans