I was asked to distribute the following message; If anybody wishes to email the author, send it to me and I will pass it along, acting as an intermediary preserving anonymity. If this person wishes to contact you, they will. Richard; I am a intellectual property attorney specializing in traemarks, in private practice. I have been a government representative to WIPO and have a good understanding of how they work. I am very concerned with WIPO's actions of late. I don't mind if you use my opinion. Also, while I personally don't have any difficulty in my name being associated with my views, I do have to be careful insofar as my firm is concerned. I've been practicing long enough that partnership should be looming on the horizon and it would be a most inopportune time to bring any negative publicity to my superiors who have no choice but to deal with WIPO as part of their business. WIPO's goal is quite transparent. I just don't understand why others are not as critical. Perhaps you have to experience the organization first hand to become cynical. TM owners have courts for recourse and always have. My initial concern regarding WIPO was that it was setting itself up to arbitrate disputes and at the same time putting itself above national laws. Now my opinion is that WIPO merely wants to control any new dispute resolution process. This means money for its ADR Center and it means more and better salaries for supragovernmental fatcats in Geneva. I thought one of the most telling aspects of the report was the fact that mediation, that is parties working together without adjudication, was downplayed while arbitration, with a "judge", ie WIPO rep, was really pushed. If WIPO really had an interest in resolving the current problems, it would educate trade-mark owners or practitioners as to ways in which the problems can be solved without resort to courts/arbitration. I think you are correct insofar as the Trade-mark profession has been giving answers that WIPO does not want to hear. WIPO is still, as I see it, trying to bend the truth so as to create a place for itself in the new order. Far from wanting to avoid a backlash against WIPO, I'm continuing to wait expectantly for the implosion. The quicker WIPO is out of the picture the better, I don't trust them and I don't like that they puport to speak for the TM profession or TM owners. -- "That's why there is a Protocol SO. To decide what the next number after 16 is." - Dixon (tinc) __________________________________________________ To receive the digest version instead, send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___END____________________________________________
