[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The Fame Claim List -was [wg-b] notification as compromise?
The contents of the notice letter should certainly be drafted by ICANN/DNSO
and not a private provider of the list.
The notice letter could indicate that the letter was generated by the
appearance of a letter string so that tennissandiego.firm quickly figures
out why it got a fame claim from NISSAN.
The letter probably wouldn't say "disregard if harmless." It should
probably refer to DN registraton FAQs which would lead to information about
defenses and advice.
At 08:43 PM 9/7/99 +0200, you wrote:
>At 09:32 07.09.99 -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
>> > The primary advantage of immediate notification to the DN owner of the TM
>> > owner's claim, is that it can make a more informed decision (and
>> > dispute) before it has sunk money into the name. The notification to the
>> > TM owner is a secondary aspect to this - the cost of a cc on the email to
>> > the DN registrant is minimal and there is a benefit but to me, putting
>> > DN registrant on notice is the primary rationale - and much more useful
>> > than a passive whois (see Roeland Meyers' post), as it is evidence of
>> > actual notice.
>>from my layperson's view, this seems to make some sense. but i wonder/worry
>>about a few things.
>>how will marks be automatically regognized and judged whether they are
>>commercial and likely infringing? e.g. smuppets.com, the southern methodist
>>university pet owners club.
>>and i worry about the legitimate and small user receiving a chilling letter
>>which may not be justified.
>In cases like tenNISSANdiego, I guess a trailer saying "this is a
>notification of notification only - discard if clearly harmless" might be
>If we recommend that the searching be left to private enterprise, this body
>has no power to coerce the form of letters or notifications, so we can only
>give advice and hope for the best.
>Harald Tveit Alvestrand, Maxware, Norway
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @