Re: [discuss] Notes - Names Council Meeting, San Jose - 062599

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Mon, Jun 28, 1999 at 10:29:11PM +0000, William X. Walsh wrote:
> >
> >And indeed, that is precisely what is contemplated in the WIPO 
> >recommendations.  They *never* take precedence over law.
> 
> What about when they grant rights greater than what the law allows?

Hypothetical: WIPO writes a report granting you the right to rob
banks.  That is indeed a greater right than the law allows.  ICANN
follows that recommendation, and puts in the registrar agreement that
you have the right to rob banks.  Do you think you now have the right
to rob banks?  Do you think the courts and the police will now grant 
you immunity from prosecution when you attempt to carry out your 
robbery?

I didn't think so.

Similarly, the WIPO report cannot, in principle, grant rights greater
than what the law allows. 

Furthermore, the WIPO report, last time I looked, explicitly stated
that its recommendations don't supersede local law, and that a
complainant would always have the option of taking their case to
court. 

> Or support claims that do not meet the standards of proof?

Aside from the fact that I don't think there is any such thing in the 
WIPO report, which standards of proof are you talking about?

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain