Criticism #1 (continued): The Interim Report�s presentation of evidence and anecdotes is selective and biased ======================================================== * Key members of WIPO�s own panel of experts support the charge of bias. In particular, the designated �public interest� representative on the panel, University of Miami law professor Michael Froomkin, was so upset that he insisted that the report contain a disclaimer that the interim report represents the view of WIPO staff and not the views of its expert panel members. At least two other expert panel members feel that the report did not adequately balance the claims of the trademark interests with the interests and legitimate needs of domain name users and other constituencies. * Approximately 80% of the presentations made before the WIPO regional consultations were from trademark lawyers or trademark-holding businesses. Only a tiny handful�about four out of 155�were from individual end users or public interest groups representing domain name holder rights, freedom of speech, or free markets __________________________________________________ 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____________________________________________
