ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Micheal Zurakov Advertising for Class Members for Register.com Lawsuit | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 20 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re:This is a really dumb lawsuit
    by KarlAuerbach on Wednesday August 20 2003, @08:16PM (#12102)
    User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
    I don't agree.

    The right to not to use an asset (or contractual right) is often just as valuable as the right to use that asset.

    Quite frequently companies register domain names in anticipation; that anticipation does not always flower quickly or even ever. Take the case of the split of Hewlett Packard into HP and what is now named Agilent. Agilent (before it adopted that name) registered several domain names, one for each of the names it was considering. In that situation the intent of registering those names was merely to exclude others.

    Domain names are not such a scarce resource that public policy demands that every one is socially precious and must be used.

    Moreover, even if one does plan to set up name servers, that does not justify the seller of the name from jumping in and using that name in the interim. How would you feel if you bought a new car, and while you were going home to fetch the trade-in, the dealer took your new car out for a night on the town while proclaiming to the world that the driver and all the acts of that driver is you?

    In more crude terms, what this plaintiff is saying is that Register.com is asserting the domain name equivalent of the old droit du signor to ravish the domain name while the name's new husband is getting ready in the other room.

    By-the-way, there is no extra packet transaction overhead for a name that has been registered but which doesn't (yet or ever) have any NS records. So your argument about looking up non-existant resources doesn't seem to have a lot of weight.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a really dumb lawsuit by KarlAuerbach
    Re:This is a really dumb lawsuit
    by jberryhill on Thursday August 21 2003, @03:18AM (#12103)
    User #3013 Info

    No Karl, this is not a case of someone "jumping in" and using it, as you put it.

    Even if you register a domain name in anticipation of future use, then you put in name servers that YOU CONTROL if you want to control the use of the domain name. Register.com was simply putting in default values for registrants who failed to specify their nameservers, because the RFC requires two nameservers.

    This is more like me tying my horse to a tree in your yard, and then complaining to you that your grass gave my horse indigestion.

    So, just to make sure I understand you, I am going to point the nameservers for all of my unused domain names to cavebear.com and your server can say "NXDOMAIN" 24/7. In the meantime, don't you dare put in any records for those domain names, or else you will be interfering with my exclusive use of my property. You just keep those servers powered up and saying nix. I will also encourage millions of other people to do this. Do we have a deal?

    Nobody said anything about domain names having to be used here. The question is what gave this plaintiff or his prospective class the right to tell register.com what THEY could do with THEIR property? If you read the appellate court opinion, the issue is about deprivation of "exclusive control", and several other causes of action were struck from the complaint. The fact is the registrants were never deprived of "control" - they always had the ability to point those domain names where they wanted. But, yes, I believe that Register.com had a right to exclusive control of its property. Why doesn't that argument cut both ways?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com