Re: [wg-b] Re: Fw: Unfamous Names...

[KathrynKL@aol.com]

love@cptech.org writes:
> So the fact that there is a some report at WIPO on domain names is
>  interesting, but it doesn't mean much without national government buy-in

I would like to support the idea that the WIPO proposals on famous marks had 
little support, as I saw it, in the Internet community generally, or among 
the non-trademark Panel of Experts members in particular.  And also that 
powers to WIPO are generally designated by treaty.

The main purpose of the WIPO report was to evolve and introduce the core of 
what became the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy.  This material was the 
focus of everyone's attention, and the vast majority of debate and 
discussion.  It became Chapter 3 of WIPO's Final Report.

The famous marks section, Chapter 4 of WIPO's report, came as a real 
surprise.  It was widely criticized, with the most extensive criticism being 
that of Professor Michael Froomkin at 
http://www.law.miami.edu/~amf/commentary.htm (see the section label "The Bad 
News").  Froomkin served on WIPO's Panel of Experts. 

I think WG-B has done a much better job than WIPO, frankly, of discussing the 
need for and concerns/fears about famous mark protection.

Kathy Kleiman
ACM-IGP

>