08:20 PST 27 December, writing from California.
Dear Colleagues:
At this suggestion of Kevin Connolly, I am resubmitting this posting,
originally sent to CORE only. I have re-edited points raised by Kevin:
In this posting, I want to set forth our (PSI-Japan's) strong objections to
the
WIPO ACP delays and the transfer of Albert Tramposch from his assignment to
the
ACP project.
I first read the proposal for the dispute mediation/arbitration of tradename
conflicts last March. I have been aware for many years of the problem of
trademark pirating in Japan. Like the Internet, the Japan Trademark
application process is based upon the first to file. There is no requirement
for any proof of use or statement of intent to use the mark which is the
subject of the application.
For some time, I had been concerned with the tradename collisions and
downright
*crashes* on the Internet. I found them similar to the Wild West law of the
jungle (for Trademarks) which prevailed in Japan when I first arrived 26.5
years ago. I saw great benefits from the concept of the ACP's. I thus
elected
to go to Geneva to learn more -- and elected to sign the gTLD-MoU to show my
support for the concept.
One of the aspects which I found *particularly_laudable* was the preemptive
*exclusion* of famous trademarks from the "inventory" of names which would be
available to CORE. I've been asking, and asking --- and asking again, when
will it come to pass. There does not seem to be any plan to make it happen.
About three weeks ago, we (PSI-Japan) had applications by a Japanese
individual
for sumitomo.firm, toyota.firm, nissen.firm (sic: Nissan misspelled) and
mitsubishi.firm. I know that those pirates are out there and ready to jump on
well know marks so they can extort "tribute" from the lawful owners.
Sadly, there are no *excluded* famous marks yet. Worse than that, the "final"
version of the ACP's is not complete and has even been delayed.
[The following two paragraphs crafted to motivate CORE]:
That delay, like so many that have been thrust upon us, is endangering CORE's
credibility. What should we do, 1. delay the startup of the SRS or 2. go
ahead
with no "safety net" for the legitimate intellectual property owners?
I feel that CORE should make an appeal to WIPO to do all possible to keep the
original schedule. Lacking same, give us some convincing argument why Albert
is indispensable to some other activity -- we feel he is indispensable to
*ours*.
[Another thought which I intended to include but slipped my mind while
drafting
the prior posting: If we cannot depend upon WIPO to carry forward their
excellent proposal, then why not bring in other well know and highly competent
arbitrators, e.g. International Chamber of Commerce in Paris, American
Arbitration Association?]
OK, PAB, with your new officers and POC Members in place. Have at it. ;-)
Regards, BobC
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert F. & Jane Wms. Connelly
Internet: rconnell@psi-japan.com
California Mailing Address
17300 E. 17th Street
Unit J-222
Tustin, CA 92780-1991
TEL (714)544-6242
FAX (714)730-9434
CellPhone (714)270-3599
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*VJewx
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:17 PST