RE: [ga] Stolen domains, transfers, WHOIS, audit trails, and system integrity

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@yahoo.com>]

Hello,

--- "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
wrote:
> AFAIK, pretty much everyone who does serious trademark work pretty
> much
> agrees that just about every short word in the English language is
> trademarked for something, somewhere.  I do not know whether that

The new and probably "classic" example of UDRP going too far is their
decision over sex.biz, giving it to a complainant. Thankfully, the
owner of that domain had the sense to appeal in court, and will win,
assuming courts in Korea know what they're doing.

Perhaps there needs to be greater oversight as to who becomes a
panelist, as it's bad decisions like that which destroy the trust folks
have in the process, and make folks like Michael concerned.

I once received a C&D letter over "tax.net", with the folks claiming
they had a TM over "TAX". HAHAHA! After my strongly worded reply, I
never heard from them again. I think another part of the problem is
that "default" cases, with no response, make too many assumptions in
favour of the complainant -- it's like the panelists are just lazy
bums, and are cutting/pasting from past decisions (that would be a
project for some students/academics out there -- run a lexical analysis
on the past decision database, and see if some are simply recycling
past decisions, and only changing a few words). Sometimes you get good
panelists who do more than simply "fill out the blanks" work, and come
to the right decision even in these default cases, e.g. Verint.com
recently:

http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/2002/d2002-0896.html

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/
--
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