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

[Dan Steinberg <synthesis@videotron.ca>]

Actually this is all irrelevant to the original discussion.
The original question i asked todd is why he feels that instituting WLS
would create a new TM class, not *if* a domain is intellectual property
or any of the other questions.

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.
So todd, how does creating a WLS or WLS-type service create a new
trademark class?

Joop Teernstra wrote:
> 
> At 12:23 p.m. 26/07/2002 -0700, William X Walsh wrote:
> 
> >Get it through your head, Todd.
> >
> >Let me spell it out very slowly for you:
> >
> >D-o-m-a-i-n   n-a-m-e-s   a-r-e   n-o-t   a-u-t-o-m-a-t-i-c-a-l-l-y
> >i-n-t-e-l-l-e-c-t-u-a-l   p-r-o-p-e-r-t-y.
> >
> >Do you understand that now, Todd?
> 
> What a briliant example of argument by bullying. :-)
> How relevant is this "not automatically" or "intellectual" anyway?
> 
> The important issue is that Domain Names do carry *a* property aspect.
> 
> >A domain name is a service, paid for, for a fixed period of time.
> 
> Repeating the mantra of the registration industry does not create law.
> There is a lot more to our Domain Names.
> 
> Property rights in Domain Names are currently sub judice in a Federal
> Appeals court.
> 
> Until this issue comes back from the Supreme Court, the battle isn't over.
> 
> And then there are the ccTLD's..., national laws, jurisdictions outside the
> U.S....
> 
> --Joop

-- 
Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin		phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec		fax:   (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html