Let me see if I got this right,
So this client walks in your door and with a million bucks wants to litigate.
Ok, so what is the problem. Well the client is a gay, transvestite, married in SF Ca, attorney, Chiropractor hooker out of Cuba, that speaks Navajo and Piute, Mormon, eats only "Rocky Mountain Oysters" and lost an arm fighting an obscene war someplace for Osama B. La di Da. Oops, and quite obviously the client is a color and old and has an erroneous HIV positive test from the English government. Sorry I forgot the client has a picture of an organ tattooed on forehead, that pulsates with _expression_, - but oh goodness a religious group put it there (not the Mormons).
Well the client says it has been discriminated against by this psuedo-governmental - contracting body, that is run by Afilias in fact. (oh dear, during the interview you find out that the citizenship is Australian and the client is applying for a USA immigrant Visa, based upon the fact that this company can only hire him with his particular status as an Ombudsman in California)<do not worry we have already established that an "ombudsman in California" is a profession worthy of dotPRO>
Well I am an attorney only licensed in Belize (dotBZ) and low and behold it turns out the spouse is a porno queen from an asian nation that is Muslim, with a pilots license but cannot land or take off a Jet. Who just happened to dodge military service while a citizen of Bosnia. Sure, the spouse is now a boxcutter salesperson in France. Danged If the cousin is not Vinton Cerf.
Well I tell you what, you take this money because no matter what; somebody somewhere discriminated against this client I damn well asure you.
But I cannot sleep because I worry that if I take the case I may lose my dotPro moonrise spot.
Can anyone help me?
Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Eric and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
stakeholders/users,
Good point. Yet in the traditional and still somewhat Victorian
valued
professional world, limited as that may be, the profession you refer to
is and was not traditionally excepted as a "profession"... Yet in some
countries prostitutes are registered professionals... So given the
Circle ID article you mention, which I read recently myself and
commented upon there, what if the lawyer/prostitute registering a .
pro Domain was indeed also a prostitute as well as a side line?
Would her domain name later be taken away once she was found
out to be a prostitute in regards to the recent indecentcy reg's being
considered?? And what would happen to this poor girls $2000.00
she payed for the "Sunrise period" for registration of that domain
name??
Is that a regulat!
ory Kink,
pardon the pun?? >;)
Hugh Dierker wrote:
> I tell you mano,
> this is even funnier and watch our Latin American and Asian Lawyers
> say "what the Heck" I got to have a stinking norte americano badge,
> to get a stinking dot.pro?
> What were those to oldest professions?
>
> ======================================
> ================================
> [2] The Launch of .pro Domain for Professionals
> ===============================================
> =======================
> INSIDE: Top-Level Domains
> By Philippe Rodhain
> Apr 15, 2004
>
> >From 5 April to 14 May 2004 trade mark owners can apply in the .pro
> domain
> for defensive registrations corresponding to their marks. The .pro
> domain
> is only available to doctors, lawyers and CPAs during this period,
> known as
> a "sunrise period". ...During the period when the creation!
of ten
new
> generic domains is being discussed, it seems timely to wonder whether
> the
> multiplicity of generic extensions is not killing the specificity
> inherent
> of each of them. In addition, having a "sunrise period" for this new
> domain
> might be perceived by trade mark owners as an invitation to spend
> money
> rather than as a measure aimed at protecting their intellectual
> property
> rights. >>>
>
> Read More + Add Your Comment:
> http://www.circleid.com/article/568_0_1_0_C/
>
>
> Jeff Williams wrote:
> All former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,
>
> Beware ICANN Registries/registrars, you may be next inl ine
> for some more Spam enforcement responsibility..
>
> See: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/04/adultlabel.htm
> and
http://www.tc.gov/os/2004/04/040413adultemailfinalrule.pdf
>
> It has been my experience that most of the sexually explicit
> spam I received were .BIZ domain names....
>
> Regards,
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
>
> "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
> Pierre Abelard
>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> ===============================================================
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Registered Ema!
il addr
with the USPS
> Contact Number: 214-244-4827
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
Pierre Abelard
"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Registered Email addr with the
USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827