Hello Derek,
Friday, December 08, 2000, 5:27:14 PM, you wrote:
> At 5:06 PM -0800 12/8/00, William X. Walsh wrote:
>>> ... and the registrant is the person who pays the registrar money.
>>
>>ICANN doesn't agree with you. And I really don't think you do either.
> No, actually, while I might "consider" the consumer the registrant, in the
> absence of a "reseller" distinction in the ICANN agreement, the registrant
> is the person who pays a registrar for the registration of a domain name.
Then that makes you responsible for all aspects of that domain name,
under the law.
>>Because that makes you liable for the domain name as well. This means
>>that if that domain name is found to be infringing on a trademark,
>>that you are the one responsible, not your customer.
> Only if I actually register the domain.
Earlier you said that if you paid the registrar, you are the
registrant. That means you registered the domain.
> If my customers chooses to register
> famoustrademark.com, I'm certainly (as the initial registrant and temporary
> holder of the domain) welcome to not accept the transaction. I can say "No,
> I won't register famoustrademark.com for you, its too much of a risk."
Yes, but if you accept it, you accept 100% of the risk. Better
increase those prices, Derek, to cover those legal fees.
>>> If there are only two "people" in the equation, "registrant" and the
>>> "registrar", can you enlighten me (and all of us) why the person paying the
>>> registrar ISN'T the registrant?
>>
>>See above. ICANN doesn't say so.
> Cite the appropriate sections of the agreement that say "The person who
> pays the registrar for the domain is not the registrant." I challenge you
> to do so. I don't think it can be done. I've not read the ICANN agreement,
> but you're making the claim that the person who has actually engages in the
> transaction with the registrar is NOT the registrant, and I'd like to know
> by what logic you come to that conclusion. Vague statements like "ICANN
> doesn't say so" don't prove your point. Common sense logic agrees with my
> position.
No, common sense logic does not agree with your position in any way.
But then I've read the agreements I signed when I become an RSP. I
really wonder if you did based on what you said above.
>>Your logic is not only wrong, but it is not well thought out as to the
>>full consequences of this line of thinking.
> The consequences fall into the "cost of doing business" line. If you opt to
> be a reseller there are certain things you accept. The first being that you
> are RE-selling something. To RE-sell it, it must first be sold -- to YOU.
> Thus, Tucows SELLS it to you, and you RE-sell it to your customer.
Read your agreements.
> We're not talking Quantum Physics here, William. :)
No, we are talking common contract law.
And I really do not think you want to be the registrant for all these
domains, you seem to want to pull an Al Gore, and want to be the
registrant in situations that you see to be in your benefit, but not
in situations where it would not be to your benefit.
The agreements are clear, Derek. I really suggest you read them. That
you admit to not having read them prior to getting into this business
is rather disturbing to me, and should be to your customers as well.
--
Best regards,
William mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
