Re: 60 day waiting peroid.... a suggestion ...

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 8:36 PM +0200 12/21/96, Hank Nussbacher wrote:

Geee... last time I suggested this (a good few months ago), I was told
it was outside the scope of the discussion and logistically impossible
to set up (the data being proprietary to WIPO and the various national
trademark bodies).

I'm glad things have changed.

> Thanks.  That is indeed interesting and very well parts of it may be
> adopted.  How do others feel about this proposal in regards to 60 day
> wait???
>
> > This suggestion may help .......
> >
> > We were invited to comment on INTA's Sub Commitee Domain Name Proposal,
> > (sent this morning), and it may be appropriate to forward a copy to this
> > list.
> >
> >
> > " .......An issue that may raise concern is C.  Publication of
> > applications for 90 days (IAHC read 60 days) before a registration
> > becomes effective.  The publication period would indeed enable holders
> > of trademarks to express their right to claim a given name.  However,
> > the vast majority of applications will not present a conflict, yet their
> > release would be delayed for an arbitrary period, some would contend
> > without just reason.  (World-wide, there have been over 4 million domain
> > name registrations this year alone.) In addition, from a logistical
> > perspective with potentially hundreds of Registries around the world,
> > inspecting each Registry's published list for infringement or dilution,
> > becomes logistically unrealistic.
> >
> > To mitigate this potentially contentious issue, a solution would be, a
> > directory listing registered holders of trademarks, their marks and
> > contact details. The WIPO tell us more than 8 million registrations of
> > marks were in force at the end of 1994. In addition, there were 300,000
> > international registrations under the Madrid Agreement which correspond
> > to approximately 3 million national registrations.  If owners of a given
> > mark want to ensure global publication of their right to a given name /
> > mark, they submit their right in the Trademark Directory, through
> > approved channels (participating Trademark Attorneys, Patent Agents and
> > Patent and Trademark offices).
> >
> > Before issuing a new Domain Name, both the Applicant and the NIC, can
> > easily verify that a proposed name does not conflict with a registered
> > right, within a given jurisdiction.  If there is no conflict, a Domain
> > name application would be issued immediately, otherwise the
> > "consultation" process may be started, with the contact details of the
> > registered holder being known to all immediately.  If a holder of a
> > Trademark is not concerned about their name being used by another party
> > on the Internet, they do not ask to be included in the Trademark
> > Directory.
> >
> > Our development team are currently constructing http://www.trademark.org
> > The function of this site is to be a source of reference listing
> > registered holders of trademarks, the owners and agents contact details,
> > and an illustration of the mark itself.  It will be similar to our G7
> > designated facility, http://www.dir.org that provides an impartial forum
> > forthe exchange of contact details, for companies and individuals,
> > across the spectrum of communication services.
> >
> > We welcome comments and contributions."
> >
> > John Harvey.
> > --
> > __________________________________________________________________
> > John Harvey - Director of On-line Information Services.
> > mailto:john.harvey@dir.org  Fax:+1 242-326-4105 http://www.dir.org
> > Directory Corporation, Universal House, Nassau, PO N-3401, Bahamas
> > __________________________________________________________________
> >
>
> Hank Nussbacher
> IAHC member
> [the views expressed above belong to the author and do not
> necessarily reflect the views of the other IAHC members]



Simon

--
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.