RE: [ALSC-Forum] Self-regulation and ICANN

[Bruce Young]

Jeff wrote:


>  Not even .COM or .BIZ should be considered for "Special" Trademark
>protection.

Sorry, Jeff.  Although this is a rare event, I disagree with you here. :)

If we stipulate that trademarks used in domain names have value to their
holders (and even if we don't the courts do!), then we need to give the
corporation a "playground" where they can play by  their rules: i.e  COM and
BIZ.  Then tell them their rules won't apply elsewhere! All the good names
are taken in COM anyway, and BIZ is soon to be full if they follow their
current policy of giving trademark holders first dibs!  So let them have
them and good riddance!  Just keep their grasping fingers away from the
remaining TLDs!

>That would be extralegal.  This is what the Interim ICANN
>BoD, of which Esther was the COB at that time imposed upon the
>stakeholders through WIPO in the UDRP.

Yes.  I disagree with the WIPO as a choice for dispute resolution.  Their
primary focus on intellectual property rights biases them against the little
guy who's using the domain name in good faith but didn't have the money or
time to trademark their company name.  I agree that, if we can achieve our
goal of an active, influential At-Large, then that is one are that needs
strong attention, before the court pile up an egregious stack of case law to
the contrary!

Bruce Young
Portland, Oregon
byoung651@home.com
http://members.home.net/byoung651/index.html