Re: Thread 2: 60-day issue

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

Carl,

  Please read below your comments.

Carl Oppedahl wrote:
> 
> At 05:58 PM 12/24/96 -0800, Simon Higgs wrote:
> 
> >At 2:25 PM -0600 12/24/96, Steve Peterson wrote:
> >
> >Well if that's the case the registry must do due diligence with a
> >trademark search and notify all likely participents. Watch that idea
> >get shot down instantly.
> >
> >> I think you have to give the trademark owner a little time to review the
> >> application before the domain is turned on.  It's one thing to keep a
> >> domain from being turned on;  another to have an existing, active domain
> >> turned off.  It should be harder to convince a court to do the latter.  In
> >> order to level the playing field there needs to be a short period at the
> >> beginning where you're not disrupting existing activity if you shut off a
> >> domain.
> 
> I haven't seen anybody suggest that the domain name registration authority
> should be obligated to screen each domain name application for trademark
> conflicts.  Since each domain name on the Internet is accessible at web
> browsers in all the countries of the world, this would require the domain
> name registration authority to search all the trademarks in the 180 or so
> countries that have trademark systems.  While it's possible to search
> online for a dozen or so countries, for most of those countries it's not
> online.  So we are talking about a paper search in 150 or so trademark
> offices each time somone signs up for a domain name.  That would be
> unreasonable, I suggest.

  Form a legal standpoint and a feasibility standpoint I agree with you
here. ( I must bow to your knowledge in the legal area).  My only
thought
was after reading your response here, was that at some point in time
there will be some international law suites filed on behalf of the
holders
of tradmarks in those 150 or so countries that currently have no or
little
internet connectivity.  This could cause a very larg problem if a system
is not put in place to rectify this problem. Any suggestions?  I know
that you may discount this now, but this problem could occur quicker
than
any of us may think.  I really have no suggestions as to how to handle
this probability.  However some formulations as to what and how need to
be tought out and discussed.  Comments anyone?  Suggestions?   
> 
> A federal judge in the Panavision case ruled recently that NSI is under no
> general duty to screen domain names.


Regards and Merry Xmas!
-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. 
Phone :972-447-1878
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com