[process2-comments] RFC-1

 Name: Jordan Gallagher Organization: imc2.com Position: Web Developer I believe that in the case of someone who is legitimately using the domain name, and not merely wanting to sell it, you should not take away their domain name... The only exception to this should be those who are purposely trying to use a company or famous person's name. Let's say that I registered "FordMotors.com" before Ford could use it, and made a site about my dislike of Ford vehicles. I feel that it could be taken away, since I am not "Ford Motors". If, however, I called it "FordMotorsSucks.com", you should give me the protection of free speech. Another example: I have the last name "Gallagher", but there is also a famous comedian by that name. What if I registered "Gallagher.com" (already taken, BTW) and put my personal home page there? Should it be taken from me simply because someone famous takes precedence over me? No! It should be first come, first serve. So to summarize, I believe that some of the proposed expansions of RFC-1 are dangerous to free speech and you should limit the "seizure" or forced transfer of a domain to: 1. Those who buy them only to sell them, without creating a real site concerning the subject matter of the domain name. 2. Those who register a domain, create a site, but are doing so in order to block that domain's use by a major organization or famous person. I believe that in all other cases, the person is acting in "good faith" and should be allowed to keep their domain and free speech.