On 02-Mar-99 Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> At 10:54 PM 3/1/99 -0500, Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
> >I'm sorry I wrote that to you as a private post.
> >
> >OK:
> >
> >The right to use a trademark is recognized as a kind of property, of which
> >the owner is entitled to the exclusive enjoyment to the extent that it has
> >been actually used. Hamilton-Brown v. Wolf Bros, 240 US 251 (1916).
> >
> >see the other cases discussed in chapter 2:14 of McCarthy's entitled
> >"Trademarks are property rights."
>
> Thank you for the cite Martin. If anything, this can make the process even
> stronger. Under this cite, a trademarked TLD *is* property.
Not necessarily in the term you mean it. Courts have also held that trademark
rights are limited in scope. The issue at hand is how limited, and only the
court system can decide that.
It is issues like this that PLAINLY show why mandatory ADR would be a very bad
thing, in that it would further limit the availablility of cases to permit a
fleshing out of this issue in the judicial system.
----------------------------------
E-Mail: William X. Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 01-Mar-99
Time: 20:43:05
----------------------------------
"We may well be on our way to a society overrun by hordes
of lawyers, hungry as locusts."
- Chief Justice Warren Burger, US Supreme Court, 1977
