At 8/5/01 11:35 PM, William X. Walsh wrote:
>Do you point out, in LARGE type, exactly what the consequences of the
>UDRP are to your registrants?
>
>Do you make it 100% clear and in their face that the UDRP means that a
>corporation can actually steal their domain without even meeting the
>most basic requirements of the law regarding infringement?
No. However, all registrars share the same limitations, and the customer
is exposed to no more risk through my service than through yours, or
anyone else's. If it was industry standard practice to put such a warning
in large type on the site, I'd do so.
New.net, on the other hand, does NOT work like other registrars. It is a
completely different system that fails to work more than half the time,
yet it's being marketed as equivalent to the standard registrar service.
In short, yes, I think it is reasonable to expect that someone selling a
product that completely fails to work the majority of the time -- when
the competitor's products work 100% of the time -- should disclose that.
(It's even more reasonable to expect that they wouldn't attempt to sell
something that unreliable, but after all, this is the Internet.)
If you consider this "unreasonable", I we just differ in opinion and it's
not worth arguing about (however, remind me not to buy anything from you).
>Do you tell your hosting customers that come from outside AU the full
>story about the international connectivity problems that have been
>plaguing AU for the last few months, and for which no fix is really on
>the horizon for several months now? And that this means that their
>sites may be inaccessible to users in some areas of the world
>sporadically?
What's AU? Do you mean Australia? If you're thinking I'm in Australia,
you have me confused with someone else.
--
Robert L Mathews, Tiger Technologies
