Hello Jim, Friday, February 23, 2001, 7:24:08 PM, Jim McAtee wrote: > Ok, Jack. You threw down the glove in a public forum and you got a > response, just like you wanted. Now continue your legal disputes via > private email if you please. > The last thing we need on this list is the whining of domain name > speculators crying about losing copyrighted names. No domain is safe? Give > me a break. If you don't take situations such as his seriously, where reverse domain name hijacking is going on, by companies who are abusing the UDRP and are using ICANN's flawed UDRP to seize domain names they would NEVER be able to get in a court of law, and think that you are immune simply because you are not a speculator, you may find yourself with a rude awakening some day. His being a speculator has absolutely no bearing on the seriousness and wide ranging impact these decisions have on ALL of us. -- Best regards, William mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCOWS is now acting as judge ... kutomo
- RE: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCOWS is now acting as j... Josh Miller
- RE: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCOWS is now acting ... Colin Viebrock
- RE: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCOWS is now acting ... Jack
- RE: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCOWS is now act... Ross Wm. Rader
- RE: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCOWS is now... Jack
- Re: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCOWS i... Jim McAtee
- Re: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCO... Robert Kidd
- Re: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCO... William X. Walsh
- Re: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCO... Mahinder Dangwani
- RE: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCOWS is now... Jack
- RE: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCOWS i... Ross Wm. Rader
- Re: Re: Domain Disputes - TUCO... Chuck Hatcher
- UDRP Clarification [WAS: RE: R... Ross Wm. Rader
- RE: UDRP Clarification [WAS: R... Jack
- Re: UDRP Clarification [WAS: R... David Denney
- Re: UDRP Clarification [WAS: R... Chuck Hatcher
- RE: UDRP Clarification [WAS: R... Jack
- RE: UDRP Clarification [WAS: R... bill
