Kumquats
On Wed, 21 Apr 1999 22:55:34 +0100, Jeff Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>All,
>
> Brian, as you can see the depth of this persons depravity is indeed
>serious. <sigh> INdeed it is a shame that such behavior from
>individuals such as William X. Walsh even exist, as are so
>closely related to the travesty of those two boys in Littleton Colorado.
>Very scary indeed!!!
>
>William X. Walsh wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:21:53 +0100, "Brian C. Hollingsworth"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Jeff and Mr. Walsh,
>> >
>> > On the contrary Mr. Walsh. In fact Jeff's post was right on target. You
>> >continuing
>> >visceral and disgusting and dangerous language posts are very much in line
>>
>> Sigh.
>>
>> Jeff, I've never used any such language in any posts. Your
>> imagination is way too vivid for your own good. Your post was in very
>> bad taste, and every agrees, no one is taking you seriously, and I
>> mean NO ONE. I wish I could share with you some of the private emails
>> I've gotten from certain people you apparently think are taking you
>> seriously, they are quite funny. You must certainly realize that you
>> are the laughing stock of the lists, and your repeated mistakes that
>> have proven so much of what you say as wrong and lies have been quite
>> amusing.
>>
>> BTW, be careful with all these pseudonyms, I'd hate to see you develop
>> a split personality disorder to add on to your existing mental
>> illness.
>>
>> >with this unfortunate event in your country to which Jeff refers. As we
>> >are just getting some of that news here, I find the similarities in your online
>> >behavior quite similar. We shall be doing a further in depth physiological
>> >review and pass that along to agencies that we deem reasonable and of
>> >interest both in your country and in the EU, most especially.
>> >
>> >William X. Walsh wrote:
>> >
>> >> Am I the only one who finds your trivialization of what happened
>> >> yesterday repulsive?
>> >>
>> >> You really should be ashamed of yourself, and this only serves to
>> >> further show that you are not who you say you are. A CEO of a
>> >> multibillion dollar corporation would never make such a trivialization
>> >> of this travesty.
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:47:43 +0100, Jeff Williams
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >All,
>> >> >
>> >> > There seems to be some very close correlation from this individual
>> >> >of late in his responses to any postings that he specifically either does
>> >> >not completely understand, and thus feels left our, or does not agree with
>> >> >but does not have any specific alternative information, and as such is
>> >> >in semi violent means or language striking out much like what those
>> >> >"Trench Coat Mafia" group in Littleton Colorado yesterday as was made
>> >> >apparent in those individuals Web page on of all places, AOL, on of the
>> >> >"Selected" test bed registrars that ICANN in it's infinite wisdom determined
>> >> >would be a reasonable Test Bed group.
>> >> >
>> >> > It is also quite striking that Mr. Walsh has done a similar thing with his
>> >> >Domain dso.net as he indicates here as those misguided kids did
>> >> >with their web page. Truly shocking, terribly misguided and
>> >> >a strong indicator of Mr. Walsh's mental state. I can only hope
>> >> >that this individual, Mr. Walsh does not own a handgun or weapon
>> >> >of any kind....
>> >> >
>> >> >William X. Walsh wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> I would suggest you check out any response given by this person, and
>> >> >> treat his responses as very suspect.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> He is a known fraud, who in the past has claimed to have a law degree
>> >> >> from SMU, and they have verified that this claim is false. Everything
>> >> >> else this person has claimed in the past about himself has been false
>> >> >> also.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It has been proven that he is an imposter, a phoney, a fraud, and a
>> >> >> liar, if you would like to see the evidence please visit
>> >> >> http://www.dso.net/wwalsh/jeffw
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I would not depend on anything he has said, and would have your
>> >> >> question thoroughly reviewed by someone who has move experience in
>> >> >> this issue.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:11:39 -0400, Bruce I Yegelwel
>> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Anyone:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Thanks for the response. Your response assumes that the german language
>> >> >> >Hunde.com was TM'ed in Germany. The scenario is that Hunde.com is not
>> >> >> >trademarked in Germany or the US. However, Dogs.com is trademarked in the
>> >> >> >US, and makes a trademark challenge within the US against Hunde.com. Can
>> >> >> >the trademark owner of Dogs.com rightfully challenge Hunde.com under US
>> >> >> >trademark law, which for all intensive purposes, is the same trademarked
>> >> >> >word in a different language. Is there case law on this? Have courts ruled
>> >> >> >that this creates customer confusion or dilution of the mark?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >This question concerns me because the new registers will likely run into
>> >> >> >this foreign language issue accidentally. So will many new registrants in
>> >> >> >foreign countries when they register domains in their native language.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >-----Original Message-----
>> >> >> >From: Jeff Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> >> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> >> >Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 11:23 AM
>> >> >> >Subject: Re: What this is all about,was Re: take it outside boys (was "Re:
>> >> >> >easyDNS claims thefollowing TLD's ")
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>Bruce and all,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> SImple answer is, no it would not if Hunde.com and Hunde.ca were
>> >> >> >registered TM's in their respected countries as the USG recognizes those
>> >> >> >TM's.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>Bruce I Yegelwel wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> Anyone:
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> For interest, does any have an inclination as to whether a domain name
>> >> >> >registered in the English language (such as dogs.com), and trademarked with
>> >> >> >the USPTO for a USA and International Category, has any legal right to
>> >> >> >contest registration of the same domain in another language such as german
>> >> >> >(Hunde.com)? Please recall that both domains are registered in the USA
>> >> >> >because they are .com. Would it make a difference if the german domain was
>> >> >> >registered .com from a new registrar in Germany. Also would it make a
>> >> >> >difference if the domain was Hunde.ca?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >This question concerns me because the new reigistars will likely run into
>> >> >> >this foreign language issue.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> William X. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> General Manager, DSo Internet Services
>> >> >>
>> >> >> NSI & Internic news http://www.dso.net/internic/
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Regards,
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> William X. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> General Manager, DSo Internet Services
>> >>
>> >> NSI & Internic news http://www.dso.net/internic/
>> >
>> >Respectfully,
>>
>> --
>> William X. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> General Manager, DSo Internet Services
>>
>> NSI & Internic news http://www.dso.net/internic/
>
>Regards,
--
William X. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
NSI & Internic news http://www.dso.net/internic/
