what I saw on the web site a day or two ago listed five contributors for a
total of less than $100,000.
esther please define exactly what money and period of time this is supposed
to represent...
when you look at ICANN paying USC for the cost of IANA salaries since
september one, it clearly
Greg Skinner a écrit:
If domain names are expensive, people who don't need them to establish
their online presence will use something else that works just as well.
There are many alternatives. That's all I'm saying.
I take it from your response that you can afford to pay plenty for a
domain
Thinking about the following passage while walking the dog.
According to Michael Sondow, Mike roberts wrote:
The bottom line for the Initial Board is
that the USG has asked that it take up these responsibilities in
fulfillment of the White Paper. That is a sufficient authority
for us to
And you thought trademarks were a pain in the arse! See
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2206386,00.html
ISPA UK, the Internet Services Providers Association, has jumped
into the fray.
Bill Lovell
At 10:12 AM 2/11/99 -0500, somebody (I'm too tired to count ) wrote:
Let's take a step back. Keep in mind that WIPO is addressing procedures =
only, not the substantive rules of Intellectual Property Law.
When WIPO proposes to impose a mandatory arbitration scheme that could
divest a party
At 10:38 PM 2/11/99 -0500, you wrote:
I may fall out of my chair, but I am not laughing. Bill Lovell is correct as
far
as he goes: WIPO has no authority to create administrative law. But the
problem is
ICANN, not WIPO per se. If ICANN, in its monopoly position, decides to adopt
WIPO's
to the internet corporation for assigned names and numbers,
pls send me the contacts for the supporting organizations. I'm
interested to explore
further into their plans. There has been not much information concerning
the address
supporting organization. Is there an address supporting
Bill,
No need to apologize.
Some of us have been saying the same thing for years.
We keep on fighting the same battles and (fortunately) winning every
time.
It is tiring but a job worth doing.
In every case what is required is a reasoned analysis that shows just
what you have demonstrated:
Jeff -- If you know thew answer to your question better than I do,
then please answer if for yourself.
I am not at all interested in playing 20 questions with you.
Over and out;-)...\Stef
From your message Thu, 11 Feb 1999 14:37:16 -0800 (PST):
}
}
}No he didn't. Because the information
Does any one have the full version (including the numbered notes
(particularly #22)) that they could pass on?
Thanks
On Fri, 12 Feb 1999, David Schutt wrote:
Try
http://www.nist.gov/admin/od/contract/9c102001.htm
David Schutt
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:06:55 -0500 (EST)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Daniel Kaplan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
From terra-nova.fr!dkaplan Fri Feb 12 10:06:53 1999
Return-Path: [EMAIL
Can we see a scanned copy of your law degree from SMU? I'd be happy to
add it to the site on your behalf, or to post up there any factual
response that you might have to refute the report.
He'd like to, but his scanner signed an NDA and cannot, by law, scan the
SMU law degree.
--
Alex
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 08:01:26 -0500 (EST)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Kevin J.
Connolly" [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
From rspab.com!CONNOLLK Fri Feb 12 08:01:24 1999
Return-Path:
Clare,
for resolution of these interests, both substantive and procedural. Some
kind of world wide consistency of approach on these issues seems eminently
desirable. The substantive issues need to be agreed, the most likely routes
Although "world wide consistency" may make arenas more
Antony --
This lists of links is encouraging. Glad to know there are so
many options. As a way to test the voting methods for reliability,
may I suggest that we set up a trial survey on DNS issues, and
open the "voting" for one day to one week, and see what we get.
The people on the lists can
Stef and all,
I don't know the answer Stef, hence my reason for asking in the first place.
Kind of a normal thing to do when one doesn't have the answer, yet the
question still lingers.
Einar Stefferud wrote:
Jeff -- If you know thew answer to your question better than I do,
then please
--
/ theory
Roeland wrote,
"The" thread has a way of being hard to pin down in c-space,
doesnt it?
Provided that it stays within certain parameters, I don't have too
tough a time of it.
I agree. Up to a point in the cognitive process, the human brain is
remarkably
Kevin and all,
Kevin, William is often misstating others positions, as his one time employer
has pointed out (.TJ). He seems to have this propensity and displays it
often.
Kevin J. Connolly wrote:
Mr. Walsh,
You've misstated my position.
I am opposed to mandatory arbitration. I am in
All,
FYI, http://cnnfn.com/digitaljam/newsbytes/126372.html
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.
Jay Venton, and all,
The problems that the ICANN and possibly the ISOC is having is of their
own making and seemingly wishing to continue by dictating without the
benefit of the Membership Organization in the case of the ICANN, policies
that have been continuingl been stated by stakeholders,
[re-threaded]
At 02:48 PM 2/12/99 -0800, Bill Lovell wrote:
At 04:58 PM 2/12/99 -0500, you wrote:
A federal district court in California has recently opined on a "
famousmarkssucks.com" cite.
Bally Total Fitness Holding Corp. v. Faber, C.D. Cal., No. CV 98-1278 DDP
(MANx), 12/21/98 ).
[re-threaded]
At 08:02 PM 2/11/99 -0500, Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
A
This case also provides a splendid example of how the WIPO process could
muck things up. Consider-
a) There is no assurance whatsoever that the WIPO process would have engaged
in an identical analysis.
This is a chauvinist
Thanks to Mr. Lovell for the cite to the site. So defendant did in fact use
www.compupix.com/ballysucks/ and not ballysucks.com. So this is a typical
case which illustrates the commentary defense to trademark infringement.
It's novel in that it's the Internet but this is not new law. Trademark
[re-threaded]
At 06:12 PM 2/11/99 -0500, Harold Feld wrote:
A federal district court in California has recently opined on a "
famousmarkssucks.com" cite.
Bally Total Fitness Holding Corp. v. Faber, C.D. Cal., No. CV 98-1278 DDP
(MANx), 12/21/98 ). (sorry, the only URL I have is a BNA
Why are these messages being reposted to the list again?
On 12-Feb-99 Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
[re-threaded]
At 06:12 PM 2/11/99 -0500, Harold Feld wrote:
A federal district court in California has recently opined on a "
famousmarkssucks.com" cite.
Bally Total Fitness Holding
On 12-Feb-99 William X. Walsh wrote:
Rather than post all the information here, I will simply post the URL to the
location of the reports. http://www.dso.net/wwalsh/jeffw/
The website was updated to make it easier to navigate, thanks to another list
member's efforts.
NIST on Becky Burrs behalf disembled as follows in the second act of
nist's failed earlier effort to give IANA to ICANN:
Government's best interest to achieve this stability and
ensure the security and reliability of the Internet by entering
a sole source contract to bridge the gap
At 14:57 12/02/99 -0500, Michael Sondow wrote:
Andrew Q. Kraft, MAIP, Executive Director a écrit:
Chon and all,
While not OPPOSED, personally, to a meeting of constituencies, keep in mind
that at this point, there are TWO proposals for the DNSO, and only ONE
defines which constituencies
George Conrades writes:
So my suggestion(s) is/are: No classes. Individuals and
organizations can be members and get one vote each. Anyone
coming up with the initiation fee and the necessary
identification can be a member.
Michael Sondow:
+ Sounds good.
Nonsense Michael. Putting
On 13-Feb-99 Michael Sondow wrote:
I strongly second this recommendation, Joop, and will militate for
it in Singapore.
Might I suggest that your militant stance is one of the biggest threats to the
standards you are advocating.
--
E-Mail: William X. Walsh
At 07:10 PM 2/12/99 -0500, you wrote:
Let's rename this thread trademarks/DNS instead of trademarks vs. DNS. The
point of the thread (and btw hats off to Mr. Meyers for trying to get the
class to behave) is hopefully to have discussions which could aid the
harmonization of TM law with the DNS.
Bill Lovell wrote:
Perhaps originally, but that is no longer the case. Several decisions have said
that NSI had NO duty to carry out TM analyses, and the mere registration of
a domain name cannot constitute TM infringement. Consequently, what sorry
excuse there ever existed for their having made
32 matches
Mail list logo
