About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

[process2-comments] RFC-1


[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

[process2-comments] RFC-1


To: process.mail@wipo.int
Subject: [process2-comments] RFC-1
From: elabuda@geminuscorp.org
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 20:15:39 +0200


 Name: Ed Labuda Organization: Geminus Corp. Position: Information Technology Services I just would like to comment that I believe domain names have always been on a first-come, first-serve basis, and should continue to be served in this fashion without giving overwhelming precedence to trademark owners. My reasoning is that trademarked words are in a different format than domain names are capable of. Domain names consist of and are recognized as characters inside of a computer by other computer systems. The characters are chosen by the registrant not unlike being able to choose one's own identification number. Since a domain name consists of this set of characters and numbers, they are unique to the internet. For example, "Toys R Us", the trademark, consists of a backwards letter "R". This is not possible with a domain name. The limitations of the domain naming system means many trademark holders will have to settle for approximations. Based on this, there is no way to be exact. The purpose of the domain naming system is to be exact and unique. This! cannot be done through approximation. Maybe the more appropriate course of action is to not allow the resale of domain names for more than the original purchase price. The domain name is more of a path to the expression of information in an enriched way that humans can interpret. Therefore I think it is more important to preserve the freedom of the individual to choose the combination of characters which defines their domain name over the enforcement of the approximation of trade names.