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

[wg-b] RE: opportunity to pre-empt, or license to infringe?

In my judgment speculation in the trademarks of others unnecessarily drives
up the cost of doing business on the Internet and reduces the efficiency of
the Internet, with no countervailing benefits.

A sunrise provision has the potential of appreciably reducing the number of
cybersquatting opportunities and, in so doing, reducing the amount of
cybersquatter-related litigation.

On balance, this benefits of the sunrise provision outweigh free speech and
hoarding concerns.

Steve Hartman

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Judith Oppenheimer [SMTP:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, April 20, 2000 1:50 PM
> To:	Hartman, Steve; 'John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D.'; wg-b@dnso.org
> Subject:	opportunity to pre-empt, or license to infringe?
> Importance:	High
> Steve Hartman, Nabisco, says,
> "[The Sunrise Proposal] simply allows trademark owners the opportunity to
> pre-empty speculators and cybersquatters."
> Cybersquatting involves infringement of trademark rights and is
> actionable.
> Speculating is legal and legitimate activity.  Trademark owners have no
> legal right to infringe on speculators' activity.
> Judith Oppenheimer