Re: Waiting periods, success and failures

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 4:20 PM -0500 1/8/97, David Collier-Brown wrote:

> Michael Dillon wrote:
> > By creating the 60 day waiting period they already have taken sides
> > with the trademark owners who do not currently have a domain name. They
> > are encouraging trademark owners to launch frivolous suits against
> > new domain name owners who have not infringed on a trademark and who have
> > no intentions of doing business in a way that infringes on a trademark.

Michael's right. This situation gives the intellectual property lawyers
and their clients control over *ALL* new delegations. That is
unconsciounable. If domains names are issued without trademark status,
this is an unacceptable precedent to set.

> > The actions of CORE/IAHC is directly damaging to these people and in
> > addition the 60 day waiting period is directly damaging to a whole
> > class of people, those who wish to register new domains, so it could well
> > lead to a class action suit against CORE/IAHC.
>
>    Well, I don't think we will see class actions, but I do see
> your arguement that this slants the field toward the challenger.
>
>   So let's look at actual behaviors in the past, and the jurisdictions
> where publication periods have been tried, so as to give us some
> kind of idea what people might be able to do.
>   I can speak a bit to the early history of trade mark, but know **zip**
> about waiting periods and where they're used.  Can someone (Carl?)
> tell us what they've been used for, and any notable sucesses and
> failures?
>

Yes, I'd like to see some more information on this too.

Regards,

Simon

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