[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [discuss] Notes - Names Council Meeting, San Jose - 062599
Speaking as an advisor to WIPO in this process, I believe this
argument-from-authority is an argument we should reject. The WIPO report
should stand (or fall) on its merits. Cf.
http://www.law.miami.edu/~amf/commentary.htm
FWIW, I happen to think that the ADR (minus famous marks) is only a few
tweaks away from being an improvement over the status quo. But these are
important tweaks.
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Kent Crispin wrote:
[...]
> The WIPO report studied this exact issue with a great deal more
> expertise than is going to be found on this list. Frankly, I don't
> think that ICANN really has the option of ignoring it. The basic
--
A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
--> It's hot here. <--