Re: [ga] Stolen domains, transfers, WHOIS, audit trails, and systemintegrity

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Marilyn and all assembly members,

  Firstof all here Merilyn you are not at all addressing Karls comments
below at all.  He made no reference directly or indirectly to ICANN developing
new IP law, but rather IP regulation.  There is a huge difference
between the two.

  Second Marilyn Frommkin's comments are more to the point, and have
been throughout this debate that has been ongoing for sometime and
you played no more of a significant role more than anyone else.
I can however appreciate your desiring to toot your own horn and
AT&T's, so to speak...   That form of indirect lobbying you are of course
well known for with respect to Special Interest Group activities...  Given
AT&T's lackluster stock and bond performance of late, this is of course
understandable on several business levels and longer term financial
considerations...

  It would be much more appreciated I believe that such misrepresentations
attributed to Karl incorrectly as I have pointed out here and others,
including Michael Froomkin did in his response, be directed more towards
the substance of the issue in consideration or being discussed.

  Indeed as the supreme court recently ruled that they "Cybersquatter
Act" as an act attributed to making new law from whole cloth, and
I believe Kathy Klienman once pointed out early on in this debate,
now has been thrown out, and properly so.  Extra protections for
TM holders via this ill conceived law were than and remain
inappropriate and extra legal as and adjunct to the Lanham act
and indeed may infringe upon restraint of trade.  Same has
also been shown to apply to the UDRP as well.  First use
is one of the hallmarks of Trademark law the the UDRP
and the "Cybersquating Act" sought to thwart extra legally...
The supreme court acted therefore properly in tossing the
"Cybersquating Act" back to whence if came...

Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:

> Karl,
> In this post, you are misinterpreting ICANN's ADOPTION of trademark protection developed OUTSIDE of ICANN, WITH ICANN DEVELOPING NEW IP LAWS. I am not a lawyer, but I was there through all of this debate, and played a rather visible and central role in developing the concept. ICANN relies on existing trademark law.
>
> I am disappointed in this attribution. It's "interesting" but flawed... and not like you.
>
> Marilyn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karl Auerbach [mailto:karl@CaveBear.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 4:03 PM
> To: George Kirikos
> Cc: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [ga] Stolen domains, transfers, WHOIS, audit trails, and
> systemintegrity
>
> On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, George Kirikos wrote:
>
> > The domain industry needs to have some stronger and explicit ICANN
> > policies (and not just "registry policies that do not disagree with
> > ICANN policies")...
> ..
> > It shouldn't have to be "caveat emptor", etc....we need stronger
> > protections, like real estate.
>
> ICANN is not a legislature, neither is it a sheriff nor is it a judge and
> jury.
>
> The efforts of the trademark industry to turn ICANN into all of those have
> resulted in many of ICANN's problems.
>
> We should be shrinking ICANN's role, rather than increasing it.
>
> If you look for the protection of rights and if you feel that you have an
> unequal bargaining power to enter into contracts that protect your
> interests, then the place to go is a legislature, not ICANN.
>
>                 --karl--
>
> --
> 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
>
> --
> 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

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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