At 03:28 PM 2/9/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Hello Bret and Roeland and all --
>
>>
>The AIP concepts of Research Committees that are obligated to fair
>evaluation of the related issues is one way to reduce this tension and
>leave the decisions to fair minded research committees.
The "rules" on TM-DN issues are going to be made by the courts, which
have jurisdiction, and not by any of these alphabet soups, which do not.
>So, for instance, biving 33% of the votes to a TM constituency,
>coupled with a 50% quorum and majority voting, maens that the TM
>constituency can have control of any meeting where with a quorum of
>only 65%.
The "TM constituency," whatever on earth that means, can have as
big a quorum as it wants, it still won't be making the law.
>Now, as for the structural aspects of the TM/DNS conflict, the main
>problem as I see it is that there are not enough TLDs to afford all TM
>owners of the same name to also have unique DNS names with differnet
>TLD "qualifiers" which serve the same role in DNS that commercial
>categories serve in "commerce" to allow the ame name to by used
>without confusion.
>
Like I said before, quit legislating chimera: put all the companies into
the internet yellow pages and forget it. NONE OF THIS IS IN THE
HANDS OF IFWP, MAC, CHEESE, SPAGHETTI, OR WHATEVER
ALPHABET YOU WANT. Thank God we have laws in this country.
Bill Lovell
