Re: Who really benefits from 60-day period?

[Vince Wolodkin <wolodkin@digitalink.com>]

Carl Oppedahl wrote:
> 
> At 11:28 AM 01/08/97 -0500, Vince Wolodkin wrote:
> >Carl,
> >
> >I absolutely understand your points on the future.  Courts would likely
> >view a failure to respond within the specified 60 day period as
> >favorable to the domain holder.  But what I absolutely fail to
> >understand is why the domain cannot be in use during those first 60
> >days.
> >
> >Besides, if I register a domain name and don't trademark it, aren't I
> >failing due diligence.
> 
> Surely you are aware that in many countries it takes a year or two or more
> to obtain a trademark registration.
> 

So?  Doesn't application for trademark give you standing in court?

> >If a domain name registrant wants added
> >protection, they can not use it for 60 days on their own.
> 
> No, there's a big difference between the following:
> 
> 1.  IAHC proposal in place.  Covetous trademark owner awakens to the
> Internet, tries to grab a domain name that is a couple of years old.  Judge
> laughs the trademark owner out of court, pointing out that the trademark
> owner hasn't offered any good excuse why it didn't speak up during the
> 60-day period.
> 

I would totally agree with you IF THE IAHC HAD ANY REGULATORY
AUTHORITY.  Since they are not recognized by any government as having
any regulatory authority, I think I could effectively(well maybe not me
personally) argue that a 60 day period means nothing because their is no
regulatory authority.

> 2.  VW proposal in place.  Covetous trademark owner awakens to the
> Internet, tries to grab a domain name that is a couple of years old.
> Domain name owner pipes up, saying "oh, but during the first sixty days of
> our domain name we didn't actually use it."  Judge looks at domain name
> owner with puzzlement as to why something that the owner did or did not do, a
> couple of years ago, makes any difference now.  Lawsuit drags on until the
> domain name owner runs out of money.
> 

You have made MY point.  Since IAHC has NO regulatory authority, how can
domain holder go to court and say "Well, IAHC didn't actually let me use
the name for the first 60 days".  Judge looks at domain name owner with
puzzlement as to why something that the IAHC did or did not do, a couple
of years ago, makes any difference now.  Lawsuit drags on until the
domain name owner runs out of money.

> >The ONLY way I see this as helpful is if the CORE would be willing to
> >defend the 60 day period in court.  Then if a registrant is challenged
> >after 60 days, the CORE would get involved in the suit, taking the
> >position that the complaintant failed to file within the specified 60
> >day period.
> 
> There is no way, none at all, that any domain name registration authority
> is going to take sides in a domain name dispute.
> 

Again, you have made my point for me.  Any recognized regulatory body
ALWAYS stands behind their decisions, that's probably why they are
recognized.  It's pretty easy to hand down edicts from on high when you
don't have to back them up in court.  Step back Carl, and look again,
blink your eyes a few times to clear the fog.

> ---
> Carl Oppedahl, Oppedahl & Larson, patent law firm
> http://www.patents.com/ has hundreds of pages of answers to
> frequently asked questions on patent, copyright, and trademark law

Vince Wolodkin