Re: [ga] FYI: WLS Vote of Transfers Task Force

["J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>]

On 23:31 29/07/02, Dan Steinberg said:
>so for the sake of continuity, I ask the question again.  Every TM 
>specialist who argued for or against the WLS in front of the task force 
>seemed to agree WLS was intellectual property neutral, a position I happen 
>to agree with.

I am afraid that these specialists forgot a detail. The WLS should be 
accepted in the DN registration agreement (or renewal for the current DNs). 
That agreement also accepts the UDRP.

The WLS is not transparent to the TM in that sense that one can take 
advantage from it to defend cross-TM class boarder rights and jurisprudence 
would say if there is something in there or not. But WLS+UDRP agreement in 
the *same* document is lethal to TM. The reason why is that in accepting 
the UDRP principle you accept that good faith is a good reason to get a DN. 
SO you accept that your successor in your own DN is entitled to show his 
own good faith against UDRP challengers. This entitles your potential 
successor to take every reasonable step to that end.

1. this leads to TMsquatting
2. there is no procedure for you to UDRP your WLSuccessor

Another problem is that you pay for a WLS after having estimated your 
chances that the present owne go bankrupt or lose interest in the DN. Now 
an UDRP can change the owner with very low chances that he will drop the 
DN. Will you be returned you money, can you claim for compensation? against 
who? Can you protect your rights in sharing in the UDRP? Can you impeach 
the current owner to sell his DN?
jfc