[process2-comments] RFC-1

 Name: Marc Schneiders Organization: Venster "How do you define bad faith, abusive, misleading or unfair registration ..." There can only be bad faith, if the registrant can be proven to have registered the domain to sell it to one (1) more legitimate owner (i.e. has a TM, is called thus etc.). Whenever there are two or more legitimate owners there can be no bad faith. Or would we want the WWF (wrestlers) UDRP the WWF (panda's)? Or vice versa? (They may now, and it would show how ridiculously unclever the present UDRP rules are being implemented.) Registering a domain with the purpose to sell it to some (not a specific) interested party, is *not* bad faith. This should be clearly defined to avoid unnecessary uncertainty. Speculation may not be considered ethical by all people, it is not illegal. Do not make it illegal. This is not your task. Nor do you have the authority to change such a fundamental and universal freedom of enterprise. I cannot understand how an organization whose business it is to protect intellectual property, is helping big businesses to take names away from people who thought of registering them first. What is the difference between TMing a name and registering it as a domain? The latter is less expensive and requires less paperwork. Is it because the lawyers did not make any money on the registering of domains, that they come after them now? One would start to get such ideas in one's head. Is it really all about money and nothing else? If it is, WIPO will loose the battle. For I would not be surprised if the bad moral message from illegally taking domains (thought of by the original owner first) from people would induce people at large to take a lighter view towards illegal copying. If the big guys steel, why shouldn't we? It is an easy excuse WIPO will be providing to the world.