Re: Who really benefits from 60-day period?

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

Betty,

Betty Schafer wrote:
> 
> Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> 
> > The argument repeatedly made is that many potential disputes will
> > never even occur knowing that the courts are unlikely to entertain
> > them.
> 
> Adherance to a "recommendation" that is claimed has priority over Statue
> will not receive much air time in a Court of Law.
> 
> > Every domain holder is a potential victim of such an action,
> 
> only if they infinge or dilute a right granted to another person.  The
> vast majority will not infringe yet are being required to give 60 or 90
> days for their competitors to steal market share.
> 
> > 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.
> 
> The Police enforce the Law of the State.

  This is one place that I don't believe you are correct.  PEOPLE are
also required, to enforce the law.  Police are the "Managers of
enforcment",
courts, are the ajudicators.
> 
> Trademark Law protects the rights of a valid Trademark Owners and they
> do sleep well at night in the knowledge the are protected.

  This only applies on a national scale, not international.
> 
> An arbitary period of good behaviour offers no excuse for offenders when
> the Law is broken.

  How true.
> 
> Betty.

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