<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Freedom of Speech: a Concept Not Limited to Yankees</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/04/freedom-of-speech-a-concept-not-limited-to-yankees/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/04/freedom-of-speech-a-concept-not-limited-to-yankees/</link>
	<description>News and Views for the Domain Name Industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 02:35:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Berryhill</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/04/freedom-of-speech-a-concept-not-limited-to-yankees/comment-page-1/#comment-524655</link>
		<dc:creator>John Berryhill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 20:52:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=9549#comment-524655</guid>
		<description>Instead of a &quot;US view&quot;, &quot;an EU view&quot;, &quot;a UDRP view&quot; etc., it seems that the UDRP is a provision of the domain registration contract.

Viewed as a &quot;piece&quot; of a larger contract, then it would seem to make some sense to accord weight to the Governing Law clause of the overall contract, to which the UDRP is merely a constituent component.

Why should a contract between myself and, say, GoDaddy, be interpreted in some manner inconsistent with the prevailing law of Arizona?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Instead of a &#8220;US view&#8221;, &#8220;an EU view&#8221;, &#8220;a UDRP view&#8221; etc., it seems that the UDRP is a provision of the domain registration contract.</p>
<p>Viewed as a &#8220;piece&#8221; of a larger contract, then it would seem to make some sense to accord weight to the Governing Law clause of the overall contract, to which the UDRP is merely a constituent component.</p>
<p>Why should a contract between myself and, say, GoDaddy, be interpreted in some manner inconsistent with the prevailing law of Arizona?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Latest Domainer News</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/04/freedom-of-speech-a-concept-not-limited-to-yankees/comment-page-1/#comment-528791</link>
		<dc:creator>Latest Domainer News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 14:13:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=9549#comment-528791</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;Freedom of Speech: a Concept Not Limited to Yankees - http://tinyurl.com/yllkaz7&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">Freedom of Speech: a Concept Not Limited to Yankees &#8211; <a href="http://tinyurl.com/yllkaz7" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/yllkaz7</a></span></span></span></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

