Roeland and all,
I Have been saying this for about 3 years.
Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> At 02:02 PM 2/2/99 -0500, Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
> >
> >>Trademarks can not be usurped, in law, even if they are not registered.
>
> >This brings me to a point that is a little off topic from this thread, and
> >off topic from even the debate regarding dispute resolution in dn/tm
> >conflicts.
>
> On the contrary, I believe it to be quite germane.
>
> >So, for example, lots of Europeans can be buying and selling on ebay.com.
> >If ebay has not filed for TM protection in Germany, I can go to Germany,
> >file for ebay.com covering electronic auction services, get a registration,
> >and, theoretically, enjoin ebay.com from doing business in Germany under
> >that mark.
>
> There are a number of issues here, some of them technical. It is a fact
> that ebay.com, is in the SF Bay Area. Whether trade marked or not, it is
> registered in COM. Because of the Internet, it is visible world-wide. Such
> an injunction, from Germany, has no standing in California or US courts.
> Especially true if ebay.com is registered with USG PTO. Were I ebay.com, I
> would simply ignore such an injunction (make them go through the expense of
> bringing it into my jurisdiction, where they'd lose). But IANAL so don't
> take my advice.
>
> What's Germany going to do, filter at the borders? I don't think so. It is
> for certain that I could get PTO registration with records that back-date
> to the start of the company, in spite of the German trademark, based on
> prior use. I have already done such. What need do I have for a $250US/hr
> lawyer to tell me this? It is "black letter" law. [read "Robert J. Ringer"
> for a good analysis of lawyers and business, any CEO needs to keep up with
> this themselves and not be totally dependent on lawyers, the same holds for
> CPA's] Note that NSI's dispute resolution policy acknowledges prior use
> because NSI is a US jurisdiction company and has to abide by US law.
>
> The problem, as Vint Cerf has recently highlighted, is that DNS and
> trademark law are fundamentally incompatible. One simply can not have
> multiple references for the same name, unlike in trademark law, because
> geo-political proximity issues, a compromise which much trademark law is
> based on, are eliminated by the Internet itself. The only solution possible
> is that trademark law can not apply to DNS entries a priori. They must be
> adjudicated ad hoc.
>
> ___________________________________________________
> Roeland M.J. Meyer -
> e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Internet phone: hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com
> Personal web pages: http://staff.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
> Company web-site: http://www.mhsc.com
> ___________________________________________________
> KISS ... gotta love it!
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
