Re: How does it work in civil-law countries? (Was something else)

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

Carl,

  I have read and studied the IANA perposal and I have found that there
is at least one innaccurate statment and it is in some ways diametricly
oppisite what the IANA has in reguards to the 60 day waiting period.

  On of the innaccurate statments is as follows:

6. The renewal application must be in writing and signed with a real 
signature (until digital signature technology is considered commercially 
reliable and legally binding).

  There are several more as related to international law and treaty 
aggrements already in effect (Gatt).  This being the case, how than does
this clarify the issues with respect ti international Domain policies?

  This is where I have a problem with the IACH draft as well, (other
areas also, but lets stay on subject here).  Hence it sem that just
stating that any waiting period has nor real impact on Domain and
trademark considerations with respect to legal issues that are 
approiate.  Comments? 

Carl Oppedahl wrote:
> 
> At 09:34 AM 01/14/97 +0100, Paul Svensson wrote:
> 
> >Could anyone on the IAHC care to comment on what their plans are to promote
> >this intent in countries that do not base their legal system on case law?
> 
> Could any critic of the IAHC proposal who has offered a concrete
> alternative (understanding that such critics are in fact quite rare)
> explain how *their* alternative is supposed to work in such countries?
> 
> I assume you are talking about civil-law countries, countries that don't
> base their legal system on case law to the extent that other countries do.
> 
> The answer is simple.  The plans are to publicize the 60-day period to the
> Internet community and to the trademark community.  The International
> Trademark Association (note the word "international" in the name) has
> credibility worldwide.  Courts of all the countries of the world have heard
> of INTA and they know that INTA speaks for trademark owners in all of those
> countries.  The INTA Internet Subcommittee has published its
> recommendations which also call for a waiting period, although it isn't 60
> days but some other period.  (I trust all those who are jumping in on this
> waiting period debate have carefully read the INTA proposal, which is at
> <http://plaza.interport.net/inta/intaprop.htm>.)  When a court in a
> country, any country, gets a trademark case in some new area of law, the
> court will in fact consider, among other things, what INTA has said about
> that new area of law.
> 
> In this case the court would also look to the IAHC commentary as to *why*
> the waiting period was put into place, and will consider that as well.

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