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

Re: [wg-c] Re: IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs

To: wg-c@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [wg-c] Re: IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs
From: "Robert F. Connelly" <rconnell@psi-japan.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 21:10:02 +0900
In-Reply-To: <199908021929.MAA01682@agamemnon.home.com>
References: <Your message of "Mon, 02 Aug 1999 14:52:34 EDT." <s7a5b0ce.047@gw1.rspab.com>
Sender: owner-wg-c@dnso.org

At 12:29 02-08-99 -0700, Mark C. Langston wrote:
>I'll keep arguing for expansion, because I don't believe the above is
>true.  I think that there are TM/IP interests sitting quietly in the
>background who are willing to listen to proposals, and who are willing
>to be flexible.  I also don't believe that any one group has that kind
>of power at this point.

Dear Mark:

That sounds like a healthy approach.  Regards, BobC

References:
- Re: [wg-c] Re: IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs
  - From: "Kevin J. Connolly" <CONNOLLK@rspab.com>
- Re: [wg-c] Re: IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs
  - From: "Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>

Prev by Date: Re: [wg-c] Eureka?
Next by Date: RE: [wg-c] Mutually exclusive concepts.
Prev by thread: RE: [wg-c] Re: IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs
Next by thread: Re: [wg-c] Re: IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread