Well actually that won't make any difference. The registry is in the US and that's good enough for the US courts to assert jurisdiction. jon >-- Original Message -- >Reply-To: dns§lists.auda.org.au >Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:45:08 +1100 >To: dns§lists.auda.org.au >From: "Leefe Hicks" <wyvern§tengutech.net> >Subject: Re: [DNS] domain news > > >At 10:29 PM +1100 21/11/02, David Goldstein wrote: >>[snip] >>Domain Name Wins Court Appeal >>On 7th November 2002 a fresh decision was issued by the US >>Court of Appeals concerning the Anti-cybersquatting >>Consumer Protection Act or ACPA. >>Regular readers of Demys News will recall that under this >>Act it is possible for a US trademark holder to bring an >>action not against a domain name registrant but against the >>domain name itself. This means the registrant is >>effectively brought into a US court even if he is domiciled >>in another country. Demys last reported on this 'shepherd's >>crook' effect of US jurisdiction in I'll see your domain >>name in court! >> http://www.demys.net/news/02_nov_18_court.htm >>[snip] > >Interesting article. I suppose the moral of this article is "Don't >use an American registrar". > >-- >Leefe Hicks - wyvern§tengutech.net >http://www.tengutech.net/wyvern/ > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/ >Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the > >author, further information at the above URL. (365 subscribers.) >Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:06 UTC