RE: [discuss] Notes - Names Council Meeting, San Jose - 062599

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

That was exactly my point. The job's already been done, and continues to
be done, by exactly the folks that are supposed to be doing it. IOW, it
isn't any of ICANN's business, nor ours, not even WIPO's (presidential
request not withstanding). This is a job for our national governments,
period.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cthulhu's Little Helper [mailto:skritch@home.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 28, 1999 3:06 PM
> To: rmeyer@mhsc.com
> Cc: Kent Crispin; discuss@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [discuss] Notes - Names Council Meeting, San
> Jose - 062599
>
>
>
> On 28 June 1999, "Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com> wrote:
>
> >It's actually better than that. Treaties were ratified, last January,
> >that made cross-border trademark law more effective. I leave
> it to the
> >legal community to detail how. The situation you are worried
> about isn't
> >as bad as you think.
>
>
> Well, in this case, aren't those treaties a de facto UDR policy?
>
> --
>  Mark C. Langston
>