Re: Who really benefits from 60-day period?

[Vince Wolodkin <wolodkin@digitalink.com>]

Kind of a lame analogy since having the police is generally considered a
good thing and a benefit to all while forcing people to wait 60 days,
EVEN THOSE WITH LEGITIMATELY TRADEMARKED NAMES, is generally considered
to be bad.  I guess if the 60 day waiting period would provide me with
armed response to my company to repel trademark infringers then maybe it
would be worth it.

In short your analogy sucks.  Police are a life/death/public safety
requirement to a large portion of the population at some point in their
lives.  You trivialize what they do by comparing them to a measure
intended to minimize civil litigation, which will instead maximize it.

For example, when the new registries are online, I will register
washingtonpost.whatever.  This is a trademarked name.  I will be told I
cannot use the name for 60 days to protect myself from trademark
disputes.  My lawyers will provide documentation that we hold the
trademark for washingtonpost and that we do not wish your protection,
after all the registry is merely a publisher of my claim to
washingtonpost.whatever.

If you fail to register my claim in a timely matter I think I could
convince lawyers here to sue the IAHC/CORE as a matter of principle.  I
am sure there would be an almost limitless list of others ready to join
the suit.  Because, as someone on this list is fond of espousing, you
would be restraining trade.  

Vince Wolodkin

P.S.  The above offered scenario is an example and not intended as
anything more.  I have no plans to instigate legal proceedings against
IAHC/CORE blah blah blah...you get the point.

Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> 
> "Leo Smith" writes:
> > There will be a tremendous amount of inconvenience and hassle endured by
> > the wait-ers. By all counts, less than four tenths of one percent of users
> > would ever be affected by any claim of trademark infringement...So why put
> > so many people through the hassle and inconveience when the solution
> > applies to a fraction of a percent of total users?
> 
> You know, I've never been mugged or robbed. Why should I pay for
> police when its obvious that only a tiny fraction of the population
> ever has need for them?
> 
> The obvious answer is this: many people will never be robbed or mugged
> because the threat of the police hangs over the potential muggers.
> 
> The argument repeatedly made is that many potential disputes will
> never even occur knowing that the courts are unlikely to entertain
> them. Every domain holder is a potential victim of such an action, and
> an environment in which most of them sleep well at night is
> potentially worth the cost, just as the police may very well be worth
> the cost even if you never find yourself having to call them, by
> virtue of the fact that their existence may have prevented you from
> needing them in the first place.
> 
> Perry
> Speaking for myself, and not for the IAHC in an official capacity