Your English is fine Celdric.
I think if it came down to legal wranglings, the .dk would carry a lot of weight in this argument - if it had a gTLD you could argue otherwise. I think you did the right thing to pass over the name without resorting to legal. Perhaps you could have swapped it for a knighthood ? Sir Celdric sounds pretty good......
You have me laughing here, Jasdon. Too bad that I missed the chance to become a member of the Nobility. Hey, I could have phoned Roger Moore and Elton John on the phone and call them brother. lol.
Btw, I renewed the domains a short time ago. I'm wondering, if the Court will offer me to refund the registration costs. Eventhough I haven't much hope, that they will. lol..
The first one of course ! The second one has Iowntheworld.com.
Yes, he has a right to the domain, that is obvious. Now, any action to aquire the domain is a different story. Since he is in the public eye, fair usage could be claimed provided the domain IS actually being used under fair use. So a challenge can be made that President Bush (either one) may have greater rights to the domain than any other person. But the concideration would come down to usage. You see, if the usage did not have any commercial gain (ads, link, PPC, adsense) and it contained content that is relavant tot he subject matter (that of Presidet Bush..
At this point, if the domain has been used under "good faith", then the chances of survivng a challege is very good... were you just asking a retorical question or making a joke. LOLOL..
Okay, if we say he has a right to the domain. Has he still a right to keep it when he isn't president anymore?.
And btw, what about domains names like "president.us", "chancelor.de", "primeminister.ca" and so on. Are they also protected?..
In US, I haven't heard of a case like that. The US gov't stands on a very different policy. These are too generic to be "protected"...