In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kent Crispin writes:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 07:50:22PM -0500, Milton Mueller wrote:
> > Bill:
> > You are right and Crispin, as usual, is not only wrong, but manipulatively
> > wrong. WIPO's proposals have nothing to do with trademark law. They are an
> > attempt to exploit the bottleneck power of ICANN's monopoly over the name
> > space to give TM holders far more powerful rights, and a form of prior
> > restraint, over the use of domain names. They would create a new form of
> > administrative law that has no basis in any national government'
> > legislature.
>
> Actually, Milton, you are supporting my statement, and not Bill's.
> Let me spell that for you: Bill claimed that worrying about WIPO's
> procedures was a waste of time; that they could have no effect; that
> local trademark laws would be the deciding force. This, as you so
> forcefully point out, is ridiculous -- the WIPO procedures would, as
> you put it, create a new form of administrative law, and could
> certainly have an effect.
Kent,
we all know that you have no i dea about what you are talking about
with regards to DNSO matters. But you most certainly have no incling
about the law.
WIPO creating administrative law...
Even the judges in our little country would fall of their (nice)
chairs laughing.
el
