[FYI] (Fwd) WIPO and Domain Names

["Axel H Horns" <horns@ipjur.com>]

------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent:      	Sun, 27 Aug 2000 15:57:26 -0500
Send reply to:  	Law & Policy of Computer Communications
             	<CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM>
From:           	"James S. Huggins (Cyberia)" <Cyberia@ZNAME.COM>
Subject:        	WIPO and Domain Names
To:             	CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

We've had some discussion about the fact that WIPO thinks "sucks" is
confusing.

In that vein, I thought these three articles of interest.


http://www.afternic.com/index.cfm?a=news&sa=more&st=5024

WIPO Wants Your Comments on UDRP Changes
08/14/2000

Netizens have been given another month to respond to WIPO's call for
comments on the proposed expansion of its definition of
cybersquatting. The current proposal would extend protection to
holders of trade names, which need not be registered trademarks, as
well as to individuals and geographical placenames. Some pundits argue
against WIPO's bid to widen its mandate, pointing out the UN agency's
tendency to disproportionately favor domain name holders in cases of
alleged cybersquatting.

[page includes links to articles and a posted discussion]



http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/5/12638.html
Who the hell does WIPO think it is?
By: Kieren McCarthy
Posted: 16/08/2000 at 16:29 GMT

[snip]

What we're looking at here is a coup by WIPO over every other body set
up to resolve Internet argy-bargy. And how do you run a coup? You get
either the military of the money-makers on your side. Seeing as there
isn't any Internet military, it has gone for the fat and rich
corporations.

[snip]

As it stands, there are four agencies capable of settling URL
disputes: WIPO, NAF (National Arbitration Forum), eResolution and the
CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution (CPRADR). But then when most of
the cases are thrown at WIPO, the others bodies become transparent

[snip]



http://news.globetechnology.com/archive/gam/News/20000815/RBARC.html

Barcelona domain name ruling draws fire

JOHN PARTRIDGE
The Globe and Mail
Tuesday, August 15, 2000

[snip]

An arbitrator acting under a controversial new international system
for resolving domain name disputes and combatting so-called
"cybersquatting" has stripped a company controlled by a Spanish woman
and her husband of http://www.barcelona.com ,a moniker she registered
four years ago for a tourist site, and awarded it to the city of
Barcelona.

[snip]

The name was "confusingly similar" to trademarks held by Barcelona's
city council.

The city had "better rights" and "more legitimate interests" in the
name than Ms. Reira and Mr. Noguerras Cobo.

The couple was using the name in "bad faith" because they had
registered it in part to prevent Barcelona from doing so and because
they eventually planned to try to obtain some sort of a payment from
the city.

[snip]

However, she also noted that rulings under the ICANN dispute
resolution system can be reviewed in court and said a "timely court
action" by the owners of http://www.barcelona.com will "stay the ICANN
decision."

A report from Barcelona Sunday said this is what Ms. Riera and Mr.
Noguerras Cobo have in mind. The Spanish couple now own the domain
name through Barcelona.com Inc. of New York, and the company said it
will appeal the ruling to the U.S. courts because it figures it stands
a better chance of success there.


James S. Huggins
------- End of forwarded message -------