To: process.mail@wipo.int
Subject: WIPO2 RFC-3
From: "George Reese"
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 10:28:12 -0500
I think the most problematic thing about WIPO's involvement with domain name disputes is the foolish assumption that identifiers are global. The best example of this is the INN issue.
This is an important goal--but only in the context of pharmeceuticals! DNS was set up to be heirarchical. Human naming is a contextual thing. It got out of control in the context of DNS because it grew faster than ICANN's willingness to add new structure to that hierarchy. The gTLDs are absurdly treated as flat namespaces. I object to the INN proposal (and similar issues) on two fronts: * first of all, this amounts to legislation by a nongovernmental body * second of all, this regulation should only apply to a pharmeceutical domain
Another point I want to make relates to trademarks. They do not exist to protect the trademark holders. They exist to protect those who would interact with the trademark holder. This protects the trademark holder when they offer good services, but this point of view hurts the trademark holder when they fail in their services. The goal of WIPO with respect to trademarks should be to guard this protection of the consumer, to make sure that consumer is never mislead into believing they are dealing with a trademark holder when they are not AND never to be misled by the trademark holder that their are no issues with their services by squashing use of the trademark in commentary ( sucks.com, reviews.com).
--
George Reese (george.reese@imaginary.com) http://www.imaginary.com/~george phone: +1.612.991.4446 fax: +1.763.416.1689
"They say you better listen to the voice of reason But they don't give you any choice 'cause they think that it's treason So you had better do as you are told. You better listen to the radio."
-- "Radio Radio" by Elvis Costello