Intellectual Property Claim Service for .BIZ

Chuck,

I'll stick to the factual errors.

One, that you correctly predict all creative constructions of domain
names that may conflict with your mark.

The IP Claim service we deployed is for exact match, strcmp() returning 0.

Your items two and three are speculative, and anyone can speculate, which
may be the root problem.

Your conclusion (based upon one factual error and two speculative claims)
is contradicted by the experience with the URDP, and as the study was done
by academics (and fairly interesting, covering the major modes of DRP and
the outcome distributions) you may want to fix their methodology, data and
conclusions [1].

So, if you want my proposal ...

Only 2 boundary conditions removed: existance of ICANN, existance of marks.

Neat. I'd have gone for gravity myself, it is such a bother.

I hope that was interesting enough.

Fairly lame actually, on par with Jim Fleming's v8 cure for what ails the net
as a reality-based proposal, and dull-as-ditchwater/common-as-crud as netzine
sceanery.

Do your "business associates and perhaps [your] customers" give a fig about
your irrepressible vision and truth of DNS reform? Why? Are they bored?

Feel free to have the last word, its your scam. Follow-ups to the NANFG list.

Eric

References:

[1] Preliminary Report from Max Planck Institute on UDRP study, ICANN
    DNSO Intellectual Property Constituency Meeting, Stockholm, 1 June
    2001.

why aren't you signing your nasty condescending note with your NeuLevel employee status Eric?

Eric Brunner-Williams NeuStar, Inc.
Senior Technical Industry Liaison http://www.neustar.com
Phone: (Portland, ME) +1.207.xxx.xxxx (Washington, DC) +1.202.533.2600/2975
smail: 1415 Forest Ave. 04103 1120 Vermont Ave. N.W., Ste 400, 20005
email: brunner@nic-naa.net ebw@neustar.com

from another list yesterday

The IP Claim service we deployed is for exact match, strcmp() returning 0.

Eric:

  Where is my factual error? Since strcmp() only returs 0 if the whole
strings match exactly, it supports my contention that one needs to divine
EXACTLY what every possible variation would be and would have to file each
separately at a cost of $90 each. If, however, it were a substring match,
that would be (somewhat) more reasonable.

Your conclusion (based upon one factual error and two speculative claims)
is contradicted by the experience with the URDP, and as the study was done
by academics (and fairly interesting, covering the major modes of DRP and
the outcome distributions) you may want to fix their methodology, data and
conclusions [1].

  To invoke UDRP, one must begin by filing a "complaint in a court of
proper jurisdiction against the domain-name holder" and then UDRP only
deals with the dispensation of the domain once a legal resolution to the
claim of infringement is achieved. I gather that all registrars will
handle domains in such resolved cases with the .biz TLD as they have other
active TLD's--there doesn't seem to be any need for an additional step. I
don't see how this does anything but support my concerns.

Neat. I'd have gone for gravity myself, it is such a bother.

  I have also been focused on the "gravity" of this situation.

Feel free to have the last word, its your scam. Follow-ups to the NANFG list.

  Thanks, for the last word.

Chuck