Re: 60 day period

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 11:38 AM -0500 1/10/97, Vince Wolodkin wrote:

> Wow!  I am so happy a representative of INTA is on the IAHC.  In
> retrospect this was probably a mistake(ditto for WIPO) since as Mr Higgs
> points out RFC 1591 explicitly says that registries WILL NOT be involved
> in trademark issues but will instead just provide contact info to both
> parties.
>

I don't think it's a mistake to have them on the committee. I've met
both Albert and Sally and hold them both in high regard. Their input is
definately needed to clarify the intellectual property issues.

What I have a problem with is that this NEW "60-day dispute policy" is
being imposed beyond the scope of the registry duties under RFC1591.

> And as I have siad before, ANY attempt to - through registry policy -
> alleviate perceived problems in regard to points of law will severely
> backfire, one only needs to look as far as NSI to know this is so.
> Scrap everything in the draft that speaks to trademarks.  Insert the RFC
> 1591 language and create a special .tm or whatever top-level domain and
> let INTA be the steward if you want.
>

What is needed is something like this (taken from draft-higgs-tld-cat):

   4.4. Domain Name Disputes

     It is the responsibility of the applicant to be sure he is not
     violating anyone else's trademark. Each IR must include a
     statement to this effect in any registration template.

     In case of a dispute between domain name registrants as to the
     rights to a particular domain name, the registration authority
     shall have no role or responsibility other than to provide the
     contact information to both parties. In any dispute where the IR
     is named in any lawsuit, the IR should file an "Interpleader"**
     before the court, agreeing to abide by the ruling of that court.
     If the dispute is between parties in different countries, the
     World Intellectual Property Organization international arbitration
     service should be used to settle such matters. Until such a time,
     the IR is obligated to provide uninterrupted service of the domain
     in the root database.

        ** Interpleader - The IR informs the court that if the court
           will please decide who is entitled to the domain name, and
           if the court will please let the IR know, then the IR will
           delegate the domain name to the correct party.

Maybe it needs to be clarified a little, but that's the essence of what
is needed. WIPO and INTA can fulfill the dispute resolution service via
their arbitration services or by the education of their membership.

Regards,

Simon

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