At 09:30 PM 1/23/99 -0800, you wrote:
>
>On 24-Jan-99 Bill Lovell wrote:
>> Yes, but the remedies at present are often way outside the realm of
financial
>> possibility for small parties on either side. USPTO procedures, though they
>> cost also, ought at least to be somewhat less expensive. The advantage of
>> the USPTO is that it DOES HAVE TRADEMARK EXPERTISE, which is not
>> to be found in NSI nor, so far as I know, in WIPO or any other alphabet soup
>> that does not daily practice trademark law -- and in this limited case I
mean
>> U. S. trademark law.
>
>That is one exact reason why these rules have no place in the current
process.
>This is a global medium, folks.
I could not agree more -- and indeed already have, several times. However, if
you can't solve it all at once, you solve it piece by piece. Rather than
having
international alphabet soups, the expertise of which is quite unproven, I
suggest
that starting out with at least ONE mechanism (other than the courts) that has
some credibility at least gives you a working model from which a corresponding
international mechanism can grow. Example: the Patent Cooperation Treaty
works just fine, having been constructed out of the patent systems of the
signatory countries.
>
Bill Lovell
__________________________________________________
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____________________________________________
