On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
> OK, document an action by the Board that was a lie or was deceptive in some
> other way. Because "Fraud must be pled with particularity", be specific as
Don't know if it rises quite to the level of "dishonest" (although I know
people who would characterize it that way, or spin theories as to why it
reveals dishonesty), but there is something odd and uncomfortable about
the juxtaposition between between the Board resolution on WIPO (a mixture
of endorsement in principle & studied non-endorsement in principle) and
the simultaneous press communique which says that the Board likes the
WIPO principles so much it wishes to expand them to all DN related
commercial disputes.
The combination certainly leaves open the supposition that there were
other resolutions not revealed, or that the resolutions don't express the
Board's true views. A hint not lost on the DNSO's by the way.
--
A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
--> It's hot here. <--
