[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [wg-b] Points of agreement
I regret I cannot agree with the first. Reasonable criteria can be
formulated for defining a famous mark for the limited purpose of an
exclusionary rule. The second is probably right; it would depend in large
part on how many marks are deemed famous. I agree with the third.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [SMTP:Harald@alvestrand.no]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 1999 2:22 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [wg-b] Points of agreement
> It seems universally agreed that:
> - Famous marks are not defined to the point where one can make a list of
> Existence proof: The list doesn't exist.
> - Exclusions have to be applied mechanically, or they would
> a) increase the cost of registrations by requiring human judgment
> b) unacceptably increase the liability of registrars/registries
> - Exclusions of all instances of a famous mark as a substring in a domain
> name will exclude names that a court would not uphold the exclusion of.
> (existence point: tenNISSANdiego. Example point: i-hate-oreos)
> If these 3 points are agreed, I think we're moving slightly forward.
> Harald A
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway