[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-b] RESPONSE to submission from noncommercial community
Please let me straighten you out on the facts of the VW.NET case. In December
1998, the owner of VW.NET called VW and attempted to extort a substantial payment
from VW, and threatened that if VW refused to make the payment, he would sell the
domain name to the highest bidder. He said that the domain name VW.NET would be a
very valuable asset to VW because Internet users would automatically assume that
VW.NET was related to VW.
The person who actually registered the domain name VW.NET has already submitted a
Declaration to the court that he and owner of Virtual Works had attempted to
register VW.COM and couldn't, and then registered VW.NET with the thought that VW
would pay them "alot of money" some day.
VW took no action against Virtual Works until Virtual Works attempted to extort
money from VW.
Please keep these facts in mind when discussing the VW.NET case.
Judith Oppenheimer wrote:
> Philip Sheppard wrote:
> > The objective behind WG B is consumer protection. Protecting intellectual
> > property is a strategy to complete that objective.
> Philip, with all due respect, that is one of the most disingenuous statements
> I've ever read. How about protecting the consumers who own Virtual Works from
> Volkswagen, which persists in attempting to 'legally' steal vw.net?
> Or the two consumers who own small business Clue Computing and clue.com? Do
> they merit our protection from wannabe domain name hijacker Hasbro?
> > For example, when a net
> > consumer sends credit card details to Disney, that consumer expects it
> > really is Disney who owns the web site, that it is Disney who will send the
> > goods, and that Disney will be there to seek redress when nothing arrives.
> Surely you're not suggesting that consumers who pay Virtual Works, actually
> think they're buying a car?
> Or that Clue Computing clients, buying UNIX System Administration, Network
> Design and Implementation, Computer and Network Security and Software Testing,
> really think they're paying for a board game?
> > By contributing to DNSO discussion we all have a duty to avoid creating the
> > world's greatest opportunity for thieves, pirates and fraudsters.
> Here we agree. The question is, who are the real thieves, pirates and
> fraudsters? Or better yet, are you willing to add corporate domain name
> hijackers to your list of pejoratives?
> Judith Oppenheimer, 1 800 The Expert, 212 684-7210
> Publisher of ICB Toll Free News: http://icbtollfree.com
> Publisher of WhoSells800.com: http://whosells800.com
> Moderator TOLLFREE-L: http://www.egroups.com/group/tollfree-l/info.html
> President of ICB Consultancy: http://JudithOppenheimer.com: 800 #
> Acquisition Management, Lost 800 # Retrieval, Litigation Support,
> Regulatory Navigation, Correlating Trademark and Domain Name Issues.