Re: [atlarge-discuss] Trademark debate

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Bruce and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

Bruce Young wrote:

> Richard Henderson wrote:
>
> |  The hijacking of our language by the Intellectual Property brigade,
> |  supported and condoned by ICANN, is one or the great offences of this
> |  "organisation" which purports to operate on behalf of the whole world.
>
> Yes indeed.  Their UDRP, in one fell swoop, reworte long-standing trademark
> laws, in the US at least.

  The UDRP is not part of TM law in any country.  It is what it is and it is
managed by WIPO, although created by ICANN originally.  Hence even
if you loose in a UDRP filing, you can still sue in most jurisdictions to
protect
your domain name.  Legal liability insurance and Domain Name legal insurance
is now available and has been for about 2 years to cover these sorts of
potential problems or situations.  The premiums are fairly low.

> Prior to the UDRP (as noted in the Roadrunner
> cartoons!) you could have hundreds of "Acme" trademarks, as long as the
> companies weren't in the same line of business.

  And this remains true Bruce.  The UDRP did not change that at all...
Where do you get these ideas anyway?

>  But ICANN's egregious UDRP
> allow *anyone* holding a trademark for the name "Acme" to sue to obtain the
> rights for ACME.COM (which BTW currently belongs to ACME Laboratories, a
> Unix software geek's site!).

  No the UDRP only allows the holders of the TM ACME to file a UDRP
complaint, not sue.

> Unless the little guy can afford the cost of
> arbitration (I couldn't!) and then potentially a lengthly court battle to
> the tune of six or seven-figures if they win arbitration, the big guys
> always win by simply filing!

  No not always.  The Sex.com case is a particular example.  There are some
400+ other documented examples as well in various US Federal district
court jurisdictions.  The ninth in particular is one of some note and has been
also additionally noted on the DNSO GA list several times as well as in
CNN news and CNN Legal news.  The ACLU also has a library of
a number of these cases.

>
>
> |  Let's be frank : ICANN is craven and serves corporate industry,
> |  and American corporate industry in particular.

  Good point here.  Indeed you are quite correct.

>
>
> Yes.  Without a counterbalancing public voice, ICANN has been selling out
> the Internet to their corporate friends as fast as they can.  That was the
> reason for the original decison to create the At Large, and give it half the
> power on the board, to serve as a counervailing force.

  Yes this was one of several reasons.  But it was and is not now the
only reason Bruce.  It just makes good business sense, even though some
of the larger, and now financially suffering interests in the Internet biz
such as verisign, AT&T, Worldcom, Quest, and Global Crossing
don't see the forest for the trees still.  They will or they shall parish
just as US Steel did some years ago and than had to have a rebirth
to something much smaller than they once were...

>  And that is why the
> Internet industry cronies on the ICANN board have tried so had to
> invalidatev and eliminate the At Large.  They don't want anyone interfering
> with their unbridled greed!

  I have to agree here as well.  However that unbridled greed is hitting
many of ICANN"s biggest supporters pretty hard right now, and has been
for about a year.  Such unbridled greed behavior only leads to disaster.
Many of those Telcoms and related big interests are finding this out, but
slowly and the hard way...

>
>
> And that is why I feel they wouldn't hesitate to drag us into court over
> ICANNATLARGE.COM, now that the idea has been brought to their attention!

  Wrong conclusion.  ICANN will never sue...

>
>
> Bruce Young
> Portland, Oregon USA
> bruce@barelyadequate.info
> http://www.barelyadequate.info
> --------------------------------------------
> Support democratic control of the Internet!
> Go to http://www.icannatlarge.com and Join ICANN At Large!
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de