Re: trademark law

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

Net Sales allegedly said:
> 
[...]
> 
> with that in mind, and lots of folks pissed at me, can this discussion move
> on to 
1)
> developing naming schemes that work, 
2)
> that don't try to understand trademark law, 
3)
> that don't try to mediate international trademark disputes,
> or circumvent world courts. 

> i can't imagine it's impossible to develop
> standards that are in compliance with existing law; trademark law isn't
> that hard, and isn't that unfair.

RFC1591:

"4. Rights to Names
      
   1) Names and Trademarks
   
      In case of a dispute between domain name registrants as to the
      rights to a particular name, the registration authority shall have
      no role or responsibility other than to provide the contact
      information to both parties.
      
      The registration of a domain name does not have any Trademark
      status.  It is up to the requestor to be sure he is not violating
      anyone else's Trademark."

This policy seems to meet your 3 requirements, above.  Note that NSI 
seems to be out of comliance with this RFC.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com,kc@llnl.gov		the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E  87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F