[ga-tm] International Treaty on TMs
Again an example of how corporate america wants
their TMs to outweigh not only domain names but even the TMs of other countries.
The UDRP supports the position of the TM holders and WIPO is the ICANN arm that
enforces it. ICANN is supposed to be International in scope as is WIPO. Yet the
following statement is true. I suggest we draft a proposal for Stockholm for an
IDNHC and site this as an example of why LESS value be applied to TMs in regard
to domain name disputes and why International Domain Name Owners have
representation.
Much of the patent system has been revamped recently to harmonize with laws in Europe and Japan, but the United States has failed for more than a decade to join an international treaty on trademarks, for example. That is from the NY Times Article at http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/18/business/18PATE.html If you don't subscribe you won't get to read the whole thing, but this one excerpt shows a reason for a proposal. If US TM Holders refuse to join an International Treaty on TMs then their TMs cannot be considered on an international basis and therefore do NOT apply to domain names at all. That only leaves those TMs that do exist in countries that are part of the International Treaties. US TMs have no International weight since they are not part of the treaty.
That means the WIPO and the UDRP has applied US TM LAW where they should only consider what is Internationally accepted. US Law has Nothing to do with how this matter should be handled by an International organization such as ICANN, WIPO, and so called International agreements such as the UDRP. So if it is true that US TM Holders are not part of the International Treaty, then their validity in regards to domain names is even more in question. Chris McElroy aka
NameCritic
|