[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The Fame Claim List -was [wg-b] notification as compromise?

first, let's distinguish between notice to the fame claimant and notice to
the DN owner.  Your posts have tended to confuse the two.

second, your analogy to common law usage is inapplicable to a system of
registration.  In systems of registration where identity is relevant
(trademarks, incorporation (both for profit and not for profit) and
licensing, there are examinations, notifications and publications.

More relevant would be the registration of Apple Association as a not-for
profit association, not the mere use of Apple Association.  I would be
interested in what would happen if you called up your local Secretary of
State and attempted to register The Coca Cola Foundation as not forp rofit

third, assuming your argument that there is no precedent was correct, and
it isn't, the fact that a procedure doesn't exist before is not an argument
that a procedure shouldn't be adopted.

As to the assertion that in the real world people sink money into websites
before they are aware of disputes regarding the name - prudent
businesspeople don't - that's the point of a trademark search.  

The notification procedure would provide this service to the DN registrant
for free.

So Wendy, the owner of wendyszine.web gets a notice that the owners of
WENDY'S gets an email describing the scope of WENDY'S rights.  Describe the
irreparable harm that occurs.

At 09:51 PM 9/7/99 EDT, you wrote:
>Actually, I think the analogy doesn't fit.  The Internet is a stream of 
>commercial and noncommercial communication, not a system solely of
>commerce.  In the real world, there is no notification system to tell anyone 
>if a noncommercial group decides to call itself the Apple Association or 
>distribute the noncommercial Wendy's Zine.   Your recommendation of alerting 
>a commercial trademark owner of a noncommercial user's domain name 
>registration is a) unprecedented and b) likely to cause great problems for 
>the domain name holder unnecessarily.  
>Given that the costs of monitoring the WHOIS database and finding posted 
>websites is so low, why don't we give the market a shot at providing the 
>services that trademark owners can buy and use. 
>kathy kleiman
>> There is a useful function in putting the DN owner on notice that there
>>  might be a prior rights holder.  Because infringement is determined on a
>>  similarity rather than an identity standard, there is a need for a human
>>  element, and human elements can lead to bureacracies.  Many countries in
>>  the world do not have examination for prior rights - that streamlines the
>>  application process, but that can also create more inter-partes
>>  (TM owners attempting to oppose applications or cance registrations).
>>  notification, the DN owner has certainty in its ability to use a name
>>  earlier in the process.  Functions such as the fame claim list would
>>  seemingly be automatic (and non-judgemental), and provide notification.

@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @