D00027310
- Thread starter Cav
- Start date
It says "Respondent has altered its use of the DomainName, namely registered subdomains that mimic the Complainant’s trade mark orappear to have been created for fraudulent purposes"
It's not just talking about having a sedo landing page and adverts is it?
It's not just talking about having a sedo landing page and adverts is it?
How does one tell the difference between a "registered" sub-domain and a wildcard catch-all DNS setup?
I never set that test sub-domain up on my name, but that would be used as evidence.
The expert here is not so expert. He's/she's made assumptions that are almost certainly false.
manage.co.uk - managers directors managment money companies organisation Resources and Information.
manage.co.uk is your first and best source for all of the information you’re looking for. From general topics to more of what you would expect to find here, manage.co.uk has it all. We hope you find what you are searching for!
imanage.manage.co.uk
same results as
manage.co.uk - managers directors managment money companies organisation Resources and Information.
manage.co.uk is your first and best source for all of the information you’re looking for. From general topics to more of what you would expect to find here, manage.co.uk has it all. We hope you find what you are searching for!
batshtcrazy.manage.co.uk
Is this expert claiming the guy set up a sub-domain "batshtcrazy" ? Of course not, but it shows the same results as the imanage subdomian.
That's an appalling error from Nominet's expert.
The respondent didn't reply, so a summary is all there is. That's it, as much as there is going to be.
Straight to the lawyer then to save his name, or is there an appeals process?
It's dated the 21/01/25, so I think if they see this today then I believe the appeal deadline has already passed - I think it is two weeks to file a notice of appeal, but could be wrong. I believe Nominet still have it within their powers to overturn a DRS decision afterwards if it goes against justice or something - basically if the decision was so wrong, it needs to be put right. If the facts provided by the complainant turn out to be false - which could be argued in this case possible as the complainant may have alleged that the respondent had deliberately setup those sub-domains, that could be enough grounds.
It's going to be tricky though
I think these were the conditions I was thinking of, but it is in the Repeat Complaints Section so not 100% sure if would apply here.
21.3 A non-exhaustive list of examples which may be exceptional enough to justify a re-hearing under paragraph
21.2.3 include:
21.3.1 serious misconduct on the part of the Expert, a Party, witness or lawyer;
21.3.2 false evidence having been offered to the Expert;
21.3.3 the discovery of credible and material evidence which could not have been reasonably foreseen or known for the Complainant to have included it in the evidence in support of the earlier complaint;
21.3.4 a breach of natural justice; and
21.3.5 the avoidance of an unconscionable result.
21.3 A non-exhaustive list of examples which may be exceptional enough to justify a re-hearing under paragraph
21.2.3 include:
21.3.1 serious misconduct on the part of the Expert, a Party, witness or lawyer;
21.3.2 false evidence having been offered to the Expert;
21.3.3 the discovery of credible and material evidence which could not have been reasonably foreseen or known for the Complainant to have included it in the evidence in support of the earlier complaint;
21.3.4 a breach of natural justice; and
21.3.5 the avoidance of an unconscionable result.
Hook
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2024
- Posts
- 164
- Reaction score
- 119
- Trophy points
- 44
Decisions like this are why you should just not use DRS, and insist on the complaint going directly to court, kangaroo court 
D00027170 - this one is a fun read, for whatever reason these two are arguing over an ugly domain, and their web designer ended up in prison, something you'd see on EastEnders
D00027170 - this one is a fun read, for whatever reason these two are arguing over an ugly domain, and their web designer ended up in prison, something you'd see on EastEnders
rob
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2024
- Posts
- 92
- Reaction score
- 148
- Trophy points
- 34
There is a thread on Nominet forum here https://community.nominet.uk/t/manage-co-uk-drs-and-registering-subdomains/
You guys all seem to be crying about something you don't understand. Like @Murray says, without the context of what they were actually doing with those pages we've no idea if it's a fair DRS result, or not. I've had a look on Archive and can't see what he was doing, so at this point Ive no idea if a just decision or not
As always, the oracle of all knowledge has spoken. Definitive and always right. Just waiting for the cry laughing emojis to roll in now.You guys all seem to be crying about something you don't understand. Like @Murray says, without the context of what they were actually doing with those pages we've no idea if it's a fair DRS result, or not. I've had a look on Archive and can't see what he was doing, so at this point Ive no idea if a just decision or not
It doesn't really matter what they were doing though. In my opinion there is enough in the DRS expert's comments to show what the Expert thought they were doing, and we've since shown that the expert was wrong to think like that.You guys all seem to be crying about something you don't understand. Like @Murray says, without the context of what they were actually doing with those pages we've no idea if it's a fair DRS result, or not. I've had a look on Archive and can't see what he was doing, so at this point Ive no idea if a just decision or not
The complainant was able to hoodwink the expert into believing that a page like i.manage.co.uk resolving meant a deliberate action by the Respondent. Had the expert checked a random string of text, they would have quickly seen that it doesn't mean that at all.
I believe it is the Expert's job to to take reasonable steps to verify what they are being told by the complainant is true before making a decision.
Backyard5562
New member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2024
- Posts
- 25
- Reaction score
- 13
- Trophy points
- 3
ourpass.
photos.
postman.
reports.
sms.
squirrel.
Were some examples of the subdomains I saw on Archive.
photos.
postman.
reports.
sms.
squirrel.
Were some examples of the subdomains I saw on Archive.
Last edited: