Re: Thread 2: 60-day issue

[Carl Oppedahl <carl@oppedahl.com>]

At 10:39 AM 12/26/96 -0600, Karl Denninger wrote:

>> At 09:55 AM 12/26/96 -0600, Karl Denninger wrote:

[Mr. Denninger's proposal]:

>> >Publication is sufficient.  Why not design something similar to CURRENT
>> >Trademark practice in the US?

>> >--> The domain issues immediately *just like a dba or corporate name*.
>> >--> Publication occurs for, say, 60 days.  During that time period the
>> >    domain name is CONTESTABLE.
>> >--> After 60 days the publication period ends and the domain becomes by
>> >    policy INCONTESTABLE.  You can still sue, but that's the only way to 
>> >    destroy it now.

[Carl's guess number 1 as to what that proposal means]:

>> Let's flesh it out.  Domain issues immediately.  Then, for 60 days, if
>> *anyone complains*, it does not matter who or why, the domain name gets
>> turned off instantly.  But then, after the 60 days is over, it gets turned
>> back on.  (Unless someone gets a court order to block it, of course.)
>> 
>> If nobody gripes during the 60 days, then it remains on, and the registrar
>> cuts it off only if there is a court order.

[Carl's guess number 2 as to what that proposal means]:

>> Another variant is this:  Domain issues immediately.  Then, for 60 days, if
>> anyone presents a registered trademark from any country that's identical to
>> the domain name, the domain name gets turned off instantly.  But then,
>> after the 60 days is over, it gets turned back on.  (Unless someone gets a
>> court order to block it, of course.)
>> 
>> If nobody gripes during the 60 days, then it remains on, and the registrar
>> cuts it off only if there is a court order.

[It seems I misunderstood Mr. Denninger, for which I apologize]

>That's obviously not the intent nor how I'd go at this.
>
>What says that CONTESTING the name causes instant revocation?
>
>No.  You need an injunction to get the name yanked during the 60 day
>interval.  Just like in REAL LIFE if you want to stop someone from operating
>a business down the street with a name you believe is infringing.

>That's why we have COURTS Carl.

So under your proposal, what is different about the time before and after
the 60-day period ends?  It seems that someone with a gripe can sue before
or after that date.  And it seems that the domain name is active before and
after that date.  So what is the significance of that date, under your
proposal?