Nathan and all,
Well stated Nathan. We agree. I would make one caveat to your last
comment/statement, you stated, " I don't believe the name should be taken away
in any circumstance other than significant infringement based on potential
customer confusion.", I would add, or possibly amend this by saying that,
no domain name should be impeded as to it's use ( read put on hold),
removed, or otherwise diminished in any fashion, unless or until there
it is clearly proven, in a court of law or decided by mutual agreement
of the litigants by any registry/registrar.
Comments?
Nathan James wrote:
> I am not an expert, but here is what I know to be factual:
>
> In your example, the new trademark holder can have NSI put the name on hold
> without any consideration to the potential damage of the current holder of
> the domain. The current holder would HAVE to sue if they wanted to keep
> their name in operation. The trademark owner has the option to sue, but his
> case is not guaranteed. The current holder has a case, in court at least,
> because he has a common law trademark and has a legitimate interest
> continuing to use the name. His case is strengthened because he had a common
> law trademark before the other party. How the case will turn out is
> anybody's guess.
>
> Here's some opinion now: His domain name does not give him implied
> intellectual property. His business name and it's publication gives him a
> common law trademark, but not property. The court would have to weigh the
> strengths of the two trademarks and decide if they can co-exist without
> infringement or dilution.
>
> I do think that trade names and domain names should be protected from this
> kind of theft. I believe that the registered trademark owner should have no
> power to put the name on hold. I don't believe the name should be taken away
> in any circumstance other than significant infringement based on potential
> customer confusion.
>
> Nathan James
>
> ----------
> >From: "G. Ireton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Domain as related to trademark and property issues
> >Date: Tue, Mar 9, 1999, 7:09 AM
> >
>
> > Okay, so.. I have a question, pardon me if it is stupid.. I am learning.
> >
> > If I have a client that establishes a business name on the net by selling
> > services and or products under a specific name that is also the domain name
> > he has chosen to use, but does not protect the name by trademark would it be
> > possible for a person to trademark that name and then sue him for
> > infringement under the pretence that a domain is not property and does not
> > imply anything other than space? Is the implied intellectual property
> > enough? Should trade names in the startup phase of a business be protected
> > against this kind of 'theft'?
> >
> > G. Ireton
> >
> >
> > --
> > DOMAIN-POLICY administrivia should be sent to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To unsubscribe send a message with only one line "SIGNOFF DOMAIN-POLICY"
> > For more help regarding Listserv commands send the one line "HELP"
> >
>
>
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
