On 04-Jan-99 Michael Sondow wrote:
>> Overburdened from all the cases?
>>
>> There have been so FEW cases that I cannot see this as a valid argument in
>> saying that this needs to be addresses at the registration level at all.
>> The
>> simple fact is the domain name disputes are an extremely rare thing and only
>> involve a fraction of a percent of domain names registered.
>
> That's not what the trademark lawyers say, and unfortunately they have the
> ear of the courts and of the committees that are concerned with budgeting
> the courts. The lawyers say there are already too many cases for the courts
> to handle. Who knows what the real truth is?
Well, look are the numbers. They speak for themselves. The trademark lawyers
do NOT have the ear of the courts btw, the courts do not make laws, they
interpret them. That is their role. The truth is out there :)
> But the truth, as always, isn't what's important. What's important is the
> impression of the truth that the authorities have, and this impression they
> get from the lawyers, who have the numbers, expertise, and training to
> present their case better than the ISPs, registrars, and users can. That's
> why it's so terribly important that the government of the Internet doesn't
> duplicate the external government, where business lawyers have the upper
> hand.
Actually, you are only looking at a very small subset of lawyers, those who
have a direct interest in strengthening the legal protections of their clients.
They have no better case, and indeed, even they disagree on this issue.
<snipped for brevity>
> The argument that can win is not the argument that domain name/trademark
> cases are insignificant, but that no one has the right to more than one vote
> as a domain name holder. That is, users have just as much power to decide
> policy as businesses. Then, since the users are in the majority, and it's in
> the interests of the majority of users to have new gTLDs, there will be new
> TLDs. Someone's got to lose out, so it should be the minority of big
> business that loses. That's democracy. Otherwise, it's the lawyer's
> corporate state, a sort of disguised authoritarianism. Some call it fascism,
> but I wouldn't go that far :)
Michael, this makes no real coherent sense. The simple truth is this,
trademark violations are a very small subset of all domain registrations, the
numbers are there for anyone to see.
Also, it is of very questionable legality for a business model to be dictated
to new registry businesses that they provide supralegal protections to
trademark holders.
Incorporating such rules as a mandated business model for all registries is a
bad idea, and indeed may very well be illegal.
----------------------------------
E-Mail: William X. Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 03-Jan-99
Time: 19:21:46
----------------------------------
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
