[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-b] WG-B Report
Re the current replay of the free speech vs. free market controversy: "Everything that could possibly be said has been said, but not everyone has said
it." (A dictum frequently invoked by exasperated chairs of interminable discussions in Jewish organizations).
One small comment, however: Very few countries so far have enacted anything resembling the US Anti-Cybersquatting Act. The effort in which we are engaged is
supposed to be worldwide in scope and not relegate people in Malawi or Belarus to litigation in the United States, or some other country with decent anti-cybersquatting legislation.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: [wg-b] WG-B Report
Author: firstname.lastname@example.org at INTERNET
Date: 4/20/00 4:01 AM
In reply to Hope Aquilar. The WG B report under the heading "Intellectual Property Constituency Position Paper (version 3): has the wording:
"Unfortunately due to the time in which this report was
submitted to me and the rest of the Working Group, there was not adequate time for proper discussion among the Working Group B participants.
Despite the recent progress of the IPC and the registrars There remains strong opposition among many members of the Working against any additional protections for trademarks beyond the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy and national laws such as the U.S. Anticybersquatting Act and the new trademark monitoring services now coming into existence."