bounce.co.uk - Public Statement from Nominet

[Beasty]

Nominet has published the following statement at the front of both of the bounce.co.uk DRS decisions:

In July 2006 the Respondent, Michael Toth, made a formal complaint regarding the handling of certain aspects of this case. Mr Toth felt that these shortcomings unintentionally restricted his ability to put in a fully evidenced Response to the allegations.

As a result of an investigation, Nominet has upheld a key element of the customer complaint relating to the quality of customer service, which Nominet accepts fell short of the level that Nominet would usually provide. Nominet has therefore apologised to Mr Toth. Nominet has also instigated a full internal investigation into the handling of this case by our employees.

It is only fair to Mr Toth to point out that the Experts did not have the opportunity (for whatever reason) of seeing evidence in a Response from him - either on the topic of whether the domain name was generic or descriptive; or on his reasons for registration and later use. Those wishing to rely on these decisions in future are reminded that their value may therefore be limited.

At the request of Mr Toth, Nominet has agreed to write to all Dispute Resolution Service (DRS) experts and notify them of the existence of the above statement.

The matter has now been resolved to the satisfaction of both Mr Toth and Nominet.

You can find the originals here and here.

 

[grandin]

money

The matter has now been resolved to the satisfaction of both Mr Toth and Nominet.

Any money?

Lee

 

[sneezycheese]

So what happens to the domain now? i.e. Does it stay with the current registrant or does it now get transfered to the complainant? :???:

Regards,

Sneezy.

 

[grandin]

Generic

Given the experts didn't consider the true generic nature...will there be a re trial

Lee

 

[rob]

Given the experts didn't consider the true generic nature...will there be a re trial

Why?

Bounce have the name, and 'The matter has now been resolved to the satisfaction of both Mr Toth and Nominet.'

Who is still not happy out of the people involved?

 

[sneezycheese]

Bounce have the name,

...Are you 100% sure about that Rob?

 

[rob]

...Are you 100% sure about that Rob?

The domain would be 'frozen' until a dispute is ended , I am guessing the release of a statement indicates that the saga has come to a close.

The appeal still stands so:

9. DECISION
9.1 The Panel dismisses the appeal and directs that the Domain Name, ‘bounce.co.uk’, be transferred to the Complainant.

I would expect Mr Toth has a cheque in the post from Nominet, however I hope they get his right address / doesnt get lost in the post

 

[retired_member12]

The domain would be 'frozen' until a dispute is ended , I am guessing the release of a statement indicates that the saga has come to a close.

The appeal still stands so:

9. DECISION
9.1 The Panel dismisses the appeal and directs that the Domain Name, ‘bounce.co.uk’, be transferred to the Complainant.

I would expect Mr Toth has a cheque in the post from Nominet, however I hope they get his right address / doesnt get lost in the post

Let's hope the cheque doesn't 'bounce'.

 

[sneezycheese]

I would expect Mr Toth has a cheque in the post from Nominet, however I hope they get his right address / doesnt get lost in the post

...

 

[grandin]

new evidence

'seeing evidence in a Response from him - either on the topic of whether the domain name was generic or descriptive; or on his reasons for registration and later use'

Retrial can occur IF new evidence is brought forward...Nominet has accepted in this statement that evidence was missing due to an internal problem

Therefore:-

Was Client paid off

or

Set it up for a retrial

Nominet may prefer a retrial to set the POLICY straight....bounce doesnt sit very nice.

My personal opinion is that the Appeal experts got it wrong....

Detrimental to the complainants rights? Yes

Unfairly detrimental to the complainants rights? NO

The onset of the web says that many domains could infringe on others rights BUT the question is.....Does it UNFAIRLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS RIGHTS

The fact that I have a restricted Trade Mark in the term VISIONIST has truly highlighted the problem with the POLICY re rights.

Lee

 

[static]

Is this why Bob and the Board are wanting to keep the surplus?

 

[grandin]

bounce.mobi

Clearly important to rights holders...bounce.mobi indeed

Lee