Roeland and all,
The problem here is that common law Trademarks are not
recognized internationally, and aren't likely to be so for years
if not decades in the future. Hence this is a flaw that should be
reviewed by a competent TM or IP attorney forth with before you
invite yourself some legal trouble that I don't believe you want.
Half stepping won't cut it here....
Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> At 08:14 PM 4/1/99 -0500, Dan Steinberg wrote:
> >Notsofast...
> >
> >Before we (or anyone else) can cede famous names, we need an
> >appropriate international definition of 'famous names'. Right now
> >most of the world uses 'well known marks' in the trademark arena, and
> >that's as good as it gets. Remember, that's just the trademark
> >arena. Outside of trademark law, I defy anyone to come up with an
> >internationally acceptable definition of 'famous names' (other than "I
> >know one when I see one").
>
> I was thinking similarly. How about we make them present proof of
> trademark, or provide statements affirming their common-law mark.
>
> I've always appreciated NSI's delicate position, although their policy sux
> eggs.
>
> >Sorry to be a wet blanket, but just because I think .att is associated
> >with a certain firm doesn't mean everyone in the world does (actually
> >I would first think of .at&t before I thought of .att but that's
> >another story).
> >
> >The point being that it will 'fairly' difficult to make such
> >allocations. why should ford motor company get .ford instead of the
> >ford agency? Give male teens the choice between supermodels and super
> >trucks, I wouldnt want to bet on the outcome. And I am sure that
> >somewhere in the world. the alpha string 'ibm' is strongly associated
> >with something other than a certain company with headquarters in the
> >state of New York. Etc. etc.
>
> >I like Christopher Ambler's suggestion. Nothing is automatic. If
> >someone who happens to have a US Famous Mark wants to run a TLD, it is
> >possible but not guaranteed. There still has to be a process.
>
> Agreed, with a modification. They should sign a hold-harmless. Actually,
> this brings up another point related to the SLA and that is the contract
> binding the TLD owner and the organization. Granted, we need to agree on
> the service levels first, but they should be formalized shortly thereafter.
>
> I have boiler-plate, that I used for the MHSC Terms Of Service
> <http://www.mhsc.com/legal.dox/TOS_txt.html>, but I am sure Dan has better,
> or can better modify it for ORSC use.<grin> (BTW, I stole the plate from
> AOL). Since ORSC is a DE corp, it would be prudent to claim DE jurisdiction.
>
> ___________________________________________________
> Roeland M.J. Meyer -
> e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Internet phone: hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com
> Personal web pages: http://staff.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
> Company web-site: http://www.mhsc.com
> ___________________________________________________
> Lead, follow, get out of the way .... pick one!
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
