<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">

	<channel>

	<title>&#45; CircleID</title>
	<link>https://www.circleid.com/blogs/</link>
	<description>Postings from  on CircleID</description>
	<dc:language>en</dc:language>
	<dc:rights>Copyright 2026, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
	<dc:date>2026-03-31T21:29:00+00:00</dc:date>

	
	<item>
		<title> UDRP: The Liabilities for the Corporations and/or their Lawyers (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/postsudrp_liabilities_corporations_lawyers</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/postsudrp_liabilities_corporations_lawyers</link>
		<description><![CDATA[This post is based on the scenario that a trademark.tld domain name is registered with a UK ICANN accredited registrar, (they have an exclusive UK jurisdiction clause in their contracts), the trademark.tld criticism website located at that domain name is strictly non-commercial, the servers are located in the UK, and the registrant is a British citizen. In the above circumstances, the corporations and/or their lawyers are taking a big risk when they use the Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policies (UDRP) in order to silence criticism at trademark.tld. <a href="https://circleid.com/postsudrp_liabilities_corporations_lawyers">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> Online Critics and Unlawful Harassment from Trademark Holders (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/postsharassment_from_trademark_holders</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/postsharassment_from_trademark_holders</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The following is based on my experience and interpretation of the UDRP and the relevant laws of the United Kingdom and European Union. This is not legal advice but just my own experience and interpretation. How does a UK citizen create a non-commercial trademark.tld parody criticism website and avoid harassment from the trademark holder? Here are the steps... <a href="https://circleid.com/postsharassment_from_trademark_holders">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> UDRP and Article 92(b) of EUROPEAN COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 40/94 (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/postsudrp_european_council_regulation</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/postsudrp_european_council_regulation</link>
		<description><![CDATA[It has been over a year since I posted "<a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/the_non_parity_of_the_udrp/" title="The Non-Parity of the UDRP">The Non-Parity of the UDRP</a>", how little did I know then compared to now! Since that posting, the corporations and their lawyers have given me a crash course in the law and I have learned much. There are many tricks that corporations will play on a domain name registrant in order to silence criticism of the corporation and to violate the registrants right of freedom of expression without frontiers. The UDRP Administrative Proceedings is one such trick... <a href="https://circleid.com/postsudrp_european_council_regulation">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title> The Non-Parity of the UDRP (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/poststhe_non_parity_of_the_udrp</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/poststhe_non_parity_of_the_udrp</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The UDRP is obviously not working. Two websites, fundamentally the same (criticism at trademark.tld), two opposite decisions, both within weeks of each other! A Complainant (Biocryst Pharmaceuticals Inc) initiated a complaint to WIPO about one of my criticism websites (biocrystpharmaceuticals.com). The Panel found in my favour. Another Complainant (Eastman Chemical Inc) meanwhile made a complaint to NAF regarding another of my criticism websites (eastman-chemical.com). The Panel found against me. The two websites are fundamentally the same, both websites in criticism of the practices of the individual companies concerned... <a href="https://circleid.com/poststhe_non_parity_of_the_udrp">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	

	</channel>
</rss>