On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, at 16:09 [=GMT-0500], Michael Schultheiss wrote: > Marc Schneiders wrote: > > The UDRP is more than fair to people like your client trying to get a name > > cheap. If somebody messed up renewal of a domain, why don't they bear the > > consequences and pay for their fault? Make an offer to the people who have > > it now? > > So a trademark holder should register every possible permutation of > their trademark in every TLD?
I cannot see where I said that. And that was not the point you raised, was it? It was about one lost domain. Not all possible domains in the universe. Anyway, if you like to change the point, make a case, please. > It just seems that my client would be > punished by following the UDRP (the fees) for someone else's trademark > infringement. My client is discussing this matter with their lawyers > and perhaps the UDRP isn't the best step to take at this time. Well, if someone hurts you and you try to get your right through the law, it always costs money. Not only to the party that feels hurt, but also to the other side, which is dragged into court. Did you not know that this is the way the IP/Copyright people kill any file sharing software on the net? Sue them so much that they die? Napster etc. Doesn't matter whether they have a case. They can pay more lawyers. > > Any domain that expires is deleted from the dns weeks before. Why didn't > > they notice it? Did they use it at all? > > Not since they registered their new domain name. They have been scaling > back their internet presence but they now realize that there are still > several sites that point to the old domain name (i.e. domain-name.com) > and even though they currently are using domain.com, many people still > associate domain-name.com with them. So they made a misjudgement themselves? Well, we all do, and pay for it. Not wine about it.
