Re: Trademarks vs DNS -Reply -Reply

["Kevin J. Connolly" <CONNOLLK@rspab.com>]

Mr. Walsh,

You've misstated my position.

I am opposed to mandatory arbitration.  I am in favor of mandatory mediation so long as it does not require face to face meetings outside theregistrant's  locality.

KJC.2

>>> "William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net> 02/11/99 01:50pm >>>

I don't disagree with you that arbitration is the preferable method of
resolution, however I DO disagree with MANDATORY ADR.  ADR does not need to be
incorporated at this level, as ADR is an option for both parties now, without
any blessing from ICANN or NSI or the DNSO.  But to MANDATE arbritration is to
deprive one or the other party of their right to select to have their day in a
court of law where the charge must be proved according to those standards, and
that the challenger defend their charge.



On 11-Feb-99 Kevin J. Connolly wrote:
>  Roeland M.J. Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com> 02/11/99 03:30am  wrote:
>  
>  {snip}
>  {At 01:28 PM 2/10/99 -0800, Kent Crispin responded to Mikki Barry}:
>  
> >>> >Your point is completely irrelevant.  *ALL* of the discussions have
> >>> >been concerning what can be done in the context of existing trademark
> >>> >law.  The WIPO procedures etc are *ALL* things that can be done in
> >>> >the context of existing law.
> >>> 
> >>> Please re-read the WIPO draft, Kent.  It contemplates MANY things that
> >>> are
> >>> far beyond current existing law.
> >
> >>Please re-read what I wrote.  Of *course* the WIPO draft "contemplates"
> >>things beyond current law -- that's the whole point.  The question is
>  
> >It may be the point of the WIPO agreement. The point of this thread is
> >finding a compromise, not creating law.
>  
> >>whether the draft specifies things that can't be implemented because
> >>they would *contradict* current law.  For example, contractually
> >>mandated ADRs are completely consistent with current law, but they
> >>are also beyond the current law. 
>  
> >Yes they are beyond current law. They are supra-legal. Since we are NOT a
> >governing body, nor are we a legislature, what business do we have writing
> >law? There is also the question of this practice being US-legal, as it
> >requires assignation of basic rights, but this is getting beyond my
> >knowledge domain. When one starts behaving in a supra-legal manner, one
> >risks violating the law.
>  
>  Let's take a step back.  Keep in mind that WIPO is addressing procedures
>  only, not the substantive rules of Intellectual Property Law.
>  
>  Keep in mind, too, that there's a world of difference between mandatory
>  mediation (good idea :-) and mandatory arbitration (not a good idea :-)
>  
>  Mediation is essentially guided negotiations.  If either side doesn't like
>  the result, then there is no resolution.  Arbitration is a substitute for
>  going to court.  I don't wish to have to defend cybersharque.com in an
>  online environment or to be required to hop a plane to Geneva to do so.
>  
>  The beauty of mediation as ADR is that rational thinking works.  It saves
>  time and money and aggravation.  Arbitration, on the other hand, is scarcely
>  less expensive than going to court.
>  
>  Kevin J. Connolly
>  The foregoing statements are solely the author's opinions.
>  **********************************************************************
>  The information contained in this electronic message is confidential
>  and is or may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work
>  product doctrine, joint defense privileges, trade secret protections,
>  and/or other applicable protections from disclosure.  If the reader of
>  this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
>  that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this com-
>  munication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communi-
>  cation in error, please immediately notify us by calling our Help Desk
>  at 212-541-2000 ext.3314, or by e-mail to helpdesk@rspab.com
>  **********************************************************************

----------------------------------
E-Mail: William X. Walsh <william@dso.net>
Date: 11-Feb-99
Time: 10:47:33
----------------------------------
"We may well be on our way to a society overrun by hordes
of lawyers, hungry as locusts." 
- Chief Justice Warren Burger, US Supreme Court, 1977

**********************************************************************
The information contained in this electronic message is confidential
and is or may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work
product doctrine, joint defense privileges, trade secret protections,
and/or other applicable protections from disclosure.  If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this com-
munication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communi-
cation in error, please immediately notify us by calling our Help Desk
at 212-541-2000 ext.3314, or by e-mail to helpdesk@rspab.com
**********************************************************************