<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Registrar Belgium Domains Locked Out of Registry</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351</link>
	<description>News and Views from the Domain Name Industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:43:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John McCormac</title>
		<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/comment-page-1#comment-57104</link>
		<dc:creator>John McCormac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 06:12:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351#comment-57104</guid>
		<description>It should be interesting to see what impact this has on the .com zone. The crackdown on domain tasting has made the growth patterns in .com far more visible from June onwards. If I remember correctly, most of the domains in the case were frozen by the registry. If they are making it back into the deletion process, then there may be a lot deletion to hit the .com zone in the next few weeks. Has there been any development in the Dell case?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It should be interesting to see what impact this has on the .com zone. The crackdown on domain tasting has made the growth patterns in .com far more visible from June onwards. If I remember correctly, most of the domains in the case were frozen by the registry. If they are making it back into the deletion process, then there may be a lot deletion to hit the .com zone in the next few weeks. Has there been any development in the Dell case?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Michlick</title>
		<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/comment-page-1#comment-57096</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Michlick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 04:08:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351#comment-57096</guid>
		<description>@Hari: No way of telling if it&#039;s related to the lawsuit, but you would want to make sure the domain does not contain any trademark. It looks like it should delete on November 1st or 2nd. Good luck in getting it through your backorder.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Hari: No way of telling if it&#8217;s related to the lawsuit, but you would want to make sure the domain does not contain any trademark. It looks like it should delete on November 1st or 2nd. Good luck in getting it through your backorder.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hari</title>
		<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/comment-page-1#comment-57094</link>
		<dc:creator>Hari</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 04:00:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351#comment-57094</guid>
		<description>@Frank: Do you think it is related to the lawsuit? It was last updated on 27th oct. The internic whois listing is:

 Whois Server: whois.belgiumdomains.com
   Referral URL: http://www.belgiumdomains.com
   Name Server: No nameserver
   Status: pendingDelete
   Updated Date: 27-oct-2008
   Creation Date: 14-aug-2007
   Expiration Date: 14-aug-2008

Regards
-H</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Frank: Do you think it is related to the lawsuit? It was last updated on 27th oct. The internic whois listing is:</p>
<p> Whois Server: whois.belgiumdomains.com<br />
   Referral URL: <a href="http://www.belgiumdomains.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.belgiumdomains.com</a><br />
   Name Server: No nameserver<br />
   Status: pendingDelete<br />
   Updated Date: 27-oct-2008<br />
   Creation Date: 14-aug-2007<br />
   Expiration Date: 14-aug-2008</p>
<p>Regards<br />
-H</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Michlick</title>
		<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/comment-page-1#comment-57092</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Michlick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 03:41:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351#comment-57092</guid>
		<description>@Hari: Welcome to DomainNameNews. 

Your best bet would most likely be to backorder the domain through companies such as SnapNames.com, NameJet.com, Pool.com. If it is marked as &quot;pending-delete&quot; it should delete five or six days from the time it was last updated (depending on the time of day it was marked as to be deleted).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Hari: Welcome to DomainNameNews. </p>
<p>Your best bet would most likely be to backorder the domain through companies such as SnapNames.com, NameJet.com, Pool.com. If it is marked as &#8220;pending-delete&#8221; it should delete five or six days from the time it was last updated (depending on the time of day it was marked as to be deleted).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hari</title>
		<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/comment-page-1#comment-57091</link>
		<dc:creator>Hari</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 03:36:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351#comment-57091</guid>
		<description>A domain I wanted has long been parked by belgium domain and they never responded mails that I sent regarding it...

now I wois the site it says the staus is &quot;pending delete&quot; and coincidentally the expiration was as close as the last august.

how do I know if it is because of the lawsuit and can I now buy the domain? Of course it isn&#039;t (yet) being displayed as for sale at other registrars.

--- any suggestions on what lead to take. P.S: &quot;pending Delete&quot;?

Regards
-H</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A domain I wanted has long been parked by belgium domain and they never responded mails that I sent regarding it&#8230;</p>
<p>now I wois the site it says the staus is &#8220;pending delete&#8221; and coincidentally the expiration was as close as the last august.</p>
<p>how do I know if it is because of the lawsuit and can I now buy the domain? Of course it isn&#8217;t (yet) being displayed as for sale at other registrars.</p>
<p>&#8212; any suggestions on what lead to take. P.S: &#8220;pending Delete&#8221;?</p>
<p>Regards<br />
-H</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ASN5</title>
		<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/comment-page-1#comment-20031</link>
		<dc:creator>ASN5</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2008 07:15:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351#comment-20031</guid>
		<description>I hesitate to inject, as Dave is a thoughtful, thorough and formidable master of comment. Still, I think the context of the question was within the overall scope of trying to determine the danger that exists for Registered Name Holders at any registrar.

And, in that context, it becomes extremely important to understand whether the registrar in question was primarily working on its own behalf, or that of actual end users.

To cut to the last scene here, I think it&#039;s safe to say, that the larger the registrar, the more likely it is that any &quot;insider trading&quot; would be a very small percentage of their total registrations. In that case, any judge should that such injunction would have ramifications that harm the public. 

Therefore, I believe the same judge would view any &quot;irreparable damage&quot; claim in an entirely different light. Instead, I am imagining the judge would lean towards something more akin to the trusteeship imposed on various unions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hesitate to inject, as Dave is a thoughtful, thorough and formidable master of comment. Still, I think the context of the question was within the overall scope of trying to determine the danger that exists for Registered Name Holders at any registrar.</p>
<p>And, in that context, it becomes extremely important to understand whether the registrar in question was primarily working on its own behalf, or that of actual end users.</p>
<p>To cut to the last scene here, I think it&#8217;s safe to say, that the larger the registrar, the more likely it is that any &#8220;insider trading&#8221; would be a very small percentage of their total registrations. In that case, any judge should that such injunction would have ramifications that harm the public. </p>
<p>Therefore, I believe the same judge would view any &#8220;irreparable damage&#8221; claim in an entirely different light. Instead, I am imagining the judge would lean towards something more akin to the trusteeship imposed on various unions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Zan</title>
		<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/comment-page-1#comment-20026</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Zan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2008 05:18:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351#comment-20026</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;The question about the affected registrars is whether they were real registrars or registrars set up to abuse the grace period rules and indulge in trademark infringement (just like those in the .eu landrush).&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Currently this is part of what it says in ICANN&#039;s registrar accreditation agreement:

http://icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm

&lt;blockquote&gt;1.10 The word &quot;registrar,&quot; when appearing without an initial capital letter, refers to a person or entity that contracts with Registered Name Holders and with a Registry Operator and collects registration data about the Registered Name Holders and submits registration information for entry in the Registry Database.

1.11 &quot;Registrar Services&quot; means services provided by a registrar in connection with a TLD as to which it has an agreement with the TLD&#039;s Registry Operator, and includes contracting with Registered Name Holders, collecting registration data about the Registered Name Holders, and submitting registration information for entry in the Registry Database.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Unless I missed something, there&#039;s nothing there stating that registrars must exist solely to cater to end-users or register domain names for their own purposes. Try to add those kinds of &quot;restrictions&quot; and inevitably someone with differing interests will disagree.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>The question about the affected registrars is whether they were real registrars or registrars set up to abuse the grace period rules and indulge in trademark infringement (just like those in the .eu landrush).</p></blockquote>
<p>Currently this is part of what it says in ICANN&#8217;s registrar accreditation agreement:</p>
<p><a href="http://icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm" rel="nofollow">http://icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm</a></p>
<blockquote><p>1.10 The word &#8220;registrar,&#8221; when appearing without an initial capital letter, refers to a person or entity that contracts with Registered Name Holders and with a Registry Operator and collects registration data about the Registered Name Holders and submits registration information for entry in the Registry Database.</p>
<p>1.11 &#8220;Registrar Services&#8221; means services provided by a registrar in connection with a TLD as to which it has an agreement with the TLD&#8217;s Registry Operator, and includes contracting with Registered Name Holders, collecting registration data about the Registered Name Holders, and submitting registration information for entry in the Registry Database.</p></blockquote>
<p>Unless I missed something, there&#8217;s nothing there stating that registrars must exist solely to cater to end-users or register domain names for their own purposes. Try to add those kinds of &#8220;restrictions&#8221; and inevitably someone with differing interests will disagree.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John McCormac</title>
		<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/comment-page-1#comment-19906</link>
		<dc:creator>John McCormac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 18:53:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351#comment-19906</guid>
		<description>I guess that Belgium Domains will push this angle hard as it makes it look like an ordinary registrar with real clients. 

Things could get very interesting Dell decides to move against Snapnames and the other dropcatchers as part of this   action - especially if any of the problem domains happened to have been caught by the dropcatchers and then transferred. It is like a ripple effect on a pond. It could really change the domain business if the action succeeds in that it would provide a precedent that would change organised trademark infringement from being simple trademark infringement to counterfeiting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess that Belgium Domains will push this angle hard as it makes it look like an ordinary registrar with real clients. </p>
<p>Things could get very interesting Dell decides to move against Snapnames and the other dropcatchers as part of this   action &#8211; especially if any of the problem domains happened to have been caught by the dropcatchers and then transferred. It is like a ripple effect on a pond. It could really change the domain business if the action succeeds in that it would provide a precedent that would change organised trademark infringement from being simple trademark infringement to counterfeiting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Michlick</title>
		<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/comment-page-1#comment-19905</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Michlick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 18:39:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351#comment-19905</guid>
		<description>Belgium Domains was partnered with Snapnames a while back and it seems that there might be names from drops that are still with the registrar and are now locked.

/FM</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Belgium Domains was partnered with Snapnames a while back and it seems that there might be names from drops that are still with the registrar and are now locked.</p>
<p>/FM</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John McCormac</title>
		<link>http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351/comment-page-1#comment-19904</link>
		<dc:creator>John McCormac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 18:38:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/registrar-belgium-domains-locked-out/1351#comment-19904</guid>
		<description>It could be a signal that the domain business is moving away from the Wild West image. The question about the affected registrars is whether they were real registrars or registrars set up to abuse the grace period rules and indulge in trademark infringement (just like those in the .eu landrush). The nuclear option would be enjoining ICANN as an accomplice though that may be unlikely to happen.

Has Belgium Domains LLC actually provided any information as to how many of its clients are affected by this action or is it just an attempt at some spin in order to get favourable coverage?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It could be a signal that the domain business is moving away from the Wild West image. The question about the affected registrars is whether they were real registrars or registrars set up to abuse the grace period rules and indulge in trademark infringement (just like those in the .eu landrush). The nuclear option would be enjoining ICANN as an accomplice though that may be unlikely to happen.</p>
<p>Has Belgium Domains LLC actually provided any information as to how many of its clients are affected by this action or is it just an attempt at some spin in order to get favourable coverage?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
