[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Karl Auerbach wrote:
> >
> > So if Willy can demonstrate under existing laws that there is
> > a violation
> > to his right of publicity, common law trademark, that the other use is
> > false advertising or interferes with a prospective advantage,
> > or is unfair
> > competion, then fine.
> >
> > It appears that we need not add any special new rules in the
> > domain name
> > arena to deal with this situation.
> >
>
> Probably not in the US, but we surely need the same legislation to apply
> worldwide.
> I would like to be sure that the willybrown case is treated in the same way
> as jacquesdupont or mariorossi or fritzmeier or azizjamal, wherever the
> plaintiff, defendant and Registry are located.
Why should this be the case if they are not treated the same in other
countries already (and they aren't necessarily)?
>
> And this, to the best of my (low) understanding of legal matters, can be
> achieved only via international agreements (WIPO, for instance).
> N.B.:I exclude as most unpractical the other option, i.e. forcefully apply
> US law worldwide ;>).
International agreements typically take several centuries to implement
(well, perhaps a littl faster but it certainly feels that way). It
takes years of negotiation to get parties to agree (yes more
conferences). Then...
Each nation has to pass enabling legislation. And what do you do if
France passes the enabling legislation but Spain does not?
>
> Please note that here I am not defending the WIPO proposal as is, I am just
> claiming that the only stable solution can come by an international
> agreement, and that in this context WIPO seems to me to be the most obvious
> body.
Please note that to be uniformly effective, legislation is required in
several jursidictions. Consumer protection laws are very strong in
many places, and the resulting domain registration agreement would be
deemed a contract of adhesion, the ensuing clauses asserting
jurisdiction would be deemed inoperable. It will probably work in
the US, but not everywhere. But one of the rationales for the WIPO
proposal is the need for uniform solutions. If the goal is *uniform*
it's just not realistic. If the goal is not *uniform*, there's no
need for the WIPO (or any other) proposal.
>
> Regards
> Roberto
--
Dan Steinberg
SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin
Box 532, RR1 phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec fax: (819) 827-4398
J0X 1N0 e-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
