> Mark Weitzel has found what many of us have been fighting since 1995 and
> the inception of the NSI dispute policy. Individuals and small business
> interests are being stomped by trademark holders who feel that ANY use of a
> character string resembling their trademark is criminal and must be
> stopped. The WIPO policy memorializes this, and ICANN's wish to expand the
Please cite evidence for this statement. I do not believe it correctly
characterizes the WIPO final report (it may correctly characterize RFC 3,
but that is a different issue). On the contrary, while there are major
flaws in the Final Report, one of its strengths is that it recognizes that
there are many legitimate interests that must be protected other than
trademarks. This is a substantial difference from its predecessor.
See generally http://www.law.miami.edu/~amf
> WIPO policies from "just" cybersquatting to include ALL commercial domain
> name disputes is VERY telling of their motivations. Of course, I'm
Here we agree. But this is my point. We must not confuse the Final
Report, which minus the Famous Names (ch. 4) and with a few tweaks here
and there may become a deal one can live with, with this other idea to
"expand" it -- there is a big difference between the two.
> assuming here that "commercial" means that one party is a commercial
> entity. This would serve to bring the vast majority of domain name
> disputes under the mandatory WIPO policy, which serves both larger business
> interests AND WIPO.
>
It would depend what the terms of the ADR were, but one should certainly
approach this proposed broadening with great suspicion.
> The DNRC web site has a few tips on it for those fighting a US trademark
> holder, including asking for re-examination of the trademark due to the
> trademark holder's misuse of the mark. The law is clear. Registration
> alone is NOT infringement. The lawyers who write the cease and desist
This is true in the US. Whether it is true abroad is disputed.
> letters well know that. Use in a class that is not trademarked is ALSO not
> infringement. The lawyers know that as well. In many cases, they are
[....]
--
A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
--> It's hot here. <--
--
This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send
a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz.
For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/