Position on Pairing

[Skinner]

This is not based on any specific string, any strings or likeness to real life events is purely coincidental.

The current positions as far as I know are:

1), is each domain is its own unique string and there are no pairing beyond where 1 string retains the rights of reg for the .uk.
This pairing ends upon take up.

2), Only strings made clear in the DRS are subject to the DRS system. No new evidence can be added beyond the initial complaint.

Lets suppose a DRS is launched against the owner of say star.net.uk (one of the few obscure .net.uk I think still exists). The owner/registrant of star.net.uk also happens to own the .co.uk and the .uk which are unused, no pages on them at all, no redirects nothing. Neither of the other strings are mentioned in any documentation or discussions.

Are there any precedents in previous cases where other identical strings not named, have been drawn in or any sort of pairing has occurred ?

The DRS search tools are somewhat horrible, and I'm not having much luck.

 

[[email protected]]

Dear Skinner

One of my colleagues spotted your post and flagged it to me.

When they submit a DRS complaint, the Complainant must list the domain names that they are disputing in the online form.

If, for example, a complaint was filed against star.net.uk, and the case ended up requiring an Expert decision, the Expert could only give a adjudication against that specific domain name. New domain names cannot be added to a case file for a decision.

Other domain names, sometimes even gTLDs, can be included in mediated settlements if both parties come to an agreement.

Hope that helps but please don't forget that you can always send queries like this direct to us at [email protected] and one of my colleagues in our Customer Support Department will be happy to help.

Best wishes
Leanne

Membership Engagement Lead
Nominet