At 11:40 AM 2/10/99 -0800, you wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 10:33:33AM -0800, Bill Lovell wrote:
>[...]
>> The ideas that I have advanced have been, among others, to
>> (a) use the time-honored Swedish concept of the Ombudsman
>> to look after the average citizen's rights; (b) take the whole
>> trademark issue out of the picture by letting people who want
>> to find company X go to the yellow pages as occurs in the
>> real world, and so on. The point is, to concentrate on things
>> that CAN be done in the context of existing trademark law.
>
>Your point is completely irrelevant. *ALL* of the discussions have
>been concerning what can be done in the context of existing trademark
>law. The WIPO procedures etc are *ALL* things that can be done in
>the context of existing law.
>
>It's nice that you are offering ideas, but they would probably be
>taken more seriously if you became a little more familiar with what
>is actually on the table.
>
1) I'll go with what Mikki Barry said;
2) I know damn well what's on the table;
3) Save your bloody lectures.
Bill Lovell
