[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-b] wg-b
I was trying to suggest a methodology for generating a list, i.e. an inclusive
list of all who wish to be included. I have no view on list membership. However,
the standard guidelines available from WIPO, under existing trademark law, and
listings available from national offices should suffice. Why don't we start with
I find it intriguing that Mr Berryhill find the act of making a list in itself
actionable. It is very likely that he knows more about this than I do. Perhaps
he could explain why.
I think if an intent can be ascertained, it would be to save the companies
concerned from the fate you allot to them. As I believe various members of wg-b
are doing precisely this, it seems a laudable pursuit to try and unite their
efforts. I may be entirely wrong, of course.
From the perspective of most of those members, not to mention registrars, it
would seem to be life-enhancing to have not only (however necessarily
incomplete, changeable, or subject to challenge) such a list, but to use it to
protect registrars from cyber-squatting, abusive registration etc..
There may be very good legal, economic or social reasons for not doing so, but I
am unaware of what they are. I haven't been able to follow this list with my
undivided attention recently.
eileen kent wrote:
> Can companies and organizations request that their names be included in the
> list? If a company which believes itself to be famous finds that it is not
> on the list, to whom does it appeal this decision? On what is the decision
> based? Michael Palage talked about a
> combination of objective and subjective. How can you form a list if there
> has been no determination of the objective requirements? Or can you? Or did
> you? We have never managed to define fame. I've heard various suggestions
> but no "consensus" (that I can ascertain) regarding the various benchmarks,
> never mind fame itself. I have yet to see a list that WIPO has composed and
> no matter what anyone thinks about WIPO as an organization, it would be hard
> to deny that they are more appropriate than this working group to stipulate
> who's on the list. As foreshadowed by the post from Mr. Berryhill, the
> creation of the list will generate an incredible number of lawsuits. I
> thought that at least a peripheral goal of trying to give famous names
> special consideration was to relieve overburdened legal systems.
> And once the fame list is created what does it do for those on the list? It
> essentially forces them to buy domain names during a sunrise period in the
> new gtld. So they are able to protect their marks as circumscribed by the
> rules and regs. After the sunrise period-- or for that matter, during the
> sunrise period--all other incidences of the mark (read "string") can be
> registered. Just exactly where does this get anyone? I don't believe that
> this is enough of an advantage to the companies in question (famous names)
> to warrant the consequences i.e., years of lawsuits over who is or is not on
> the list.
> But I am nothing if not pragmatic. Mr. Berryhill wants to make sure his
> clients are on the list. Me too!
> Is this what the I.P. constituency really wants?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Measday" <email@example.com>
> To: "Harald Tveit Alvestrand" <Harald@alvestrand.no>
> Cc: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 3:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [wg-b] wg-b
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand a écrit :
> > I'll be happy to provide a mailing list, if that's required.
> Yes, please
> > There was no original WIPO list - they too never got past the "platitudes"
> > stage.
> Exactly why an uncritical listing of possible FM's is needed at this stage.
> > I'd suggest you sending a message to the people you want to have in on
> > this, giving 2 attachments:
> > - A list that you feel very certain is famous
> > - A list that you feel could be considered for famousness
> Yes, but my opinions are unimportant. What is important is what INTA and
> friends would like.
> > My greatest doubt is whether enough people would be willing to go out on
> > a limb and commit to defending such a list.
> No doubt. Which is why I suggest only additions to the list, whatever they
> be. Defence is a later stage.
> If you find setting up a list for this purpose impossible I quite
> I ask because of your original inclusion in the WIPO working group.and
> technical background. No inference is made to Elisabeth's recent post.
Josmarian SA email@example.comfirstname.lastname@example.org
UK tel/fax: 0044.181.747.9167
French tel/fax: 0033.4188.8.131.52
Swiss tel/fax: 0041.22.363.88.00
'Tragedy inheres in all choice' : Isaiah Berlin