No, structured TLDs do not mean that you, the registry, must perform trademark checks
before
registering a name. It simply means that the *innocent* domain name registrant engaged
in a string
conflict has an additional line of defense when challenged. To wit:
Counsel Schwimmer: Your honor, my client, Milton Mueller, registered the name
"porsche" under the
".sucks" TLD. The ".sucks" TLD is well known as a satirical site associated with
criticism of
products, people and places. He is not selling any merchandise associated with Porsche
cars and
because of the semantic content of the TLD string (sucks) there is no likelihood of
confusion." I
move to dismiss.
Judge Judy: Porsche, Inc., why did you bring this to my court! You really do suck!
Motion granted.
Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
> Marty,
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Martin B.
>Schwimmer" writes:
>
> > In short, the struture of today's structured TLDs are not enforced
> > and do not communicate a context sufficient enough to allow DNs
> > being utilized as similar trademarks to co-exist.
>
> >From a purely technical standpoint, there is just *NO WAY* to do this.
>
> As you know I operate a small ccTLD with one or two registrations per
> day at the moment. I can perhaps figure out obvious squatting attempts
> manually.
>
> But once it come to 10 registrations per day I am forced to automate
> the registration process, whether I want this or not. Nevermind places
> with 1000 or more registrations per day.
>
> You can forget about TM verification by software. I do not even want
> to think about the dilution issue.
>
> Before TM carries on lobbying, I would like to see a suggestion, now
> how this could even be done!
>
> el
