Precedence does not make it "right".  I don't fully understand the
legalities of it (Ross would have to explain - Ross?), but I
believe Register does not take control of the domain (i.e. they
don't assume ownership and sell to soemone else).  They simply
"hold" it, if it's not paid it stays on hold until the day it
expires (then it goes up for deletion)

Charles Daminato
TUCOWS Product Manager
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Mark Petersen wrote:

> Stand on precedence. Register.Com is allowed to seize domains on a daily
> basis.
> The routinely change registrants WHOIS information from whatever *was* there
> to:
>
>       register.com
>       Unpaid Names Department-R
>       575 Eighth Avenue
>       New York, NY 10018
>       US
>       Phone: 212-798-9200
>       Fax..: 212-594-9876
>       Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> If they can do it, why shouldn't we be able to?
> It's supposed to be a level playing field, right?
> Good luck,
> Mark
>
> Mark Petersen    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Planet Nic    http://www.planet-nic.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John T. Jarrett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 3:45 PM
> Subject: Changing Admin Info after Refund
>
>
> >
> > Paul over in compliance says it is against ICANN reg's for
> > me to change admin info after a customer refunds on the
> > domain name registration:
> >
> > "I hate to tell you this but you are not allowed to change
> > the whois information - ICANN rules. It appears as though
> > you are trying to take away someone else's property."
> >
> > Frankly, I couldn't care less how it looks. I've offered the
> > refund codes from the merchant account holder LinkPoint
> > themselves so there's proof behind appearances.
> >
> > Can y'all point me to what he's talking to? I can't find it
> > in the UDRP or the Reg Agreement. I don't mind complying
> > with written rules if I can find them, but I'd rather not
> > let this woman steal three domain name registrations if I
> > don't have to!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
>

Reply via email to