On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 01:57:01PM -0800, Bill Lovell wrote:
> >But it's certainly possible I may have missed something -- perhaps
> >you could list the things WIPO advocates that would break current TM
> >law?
> >
>
> Well, predominantly their whole dispute resolution bit. They don't have
> the authority to tell a U. S. Court who gets to keep a domain name and
> who has to give it up. Nor tell anyone else.
WIPO doesn't tell anyone, the registry tells their client, the
registrant, through a contract.
> Secondly, their "contractually mandated ADRs" would appear to be
> contracts of adhesion, like the NSI contract, if the execution of one
> is part of the price for getting a domain name. It's time for the advocates
> of "freedom" to jump onto this bandwagon, I should think.
Have at it.
--
Kent Crispin, PAB Chair "Do good, and you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
