Re: [registrars] Next Step

["Robert F. Connelly" <rconnell@psi-japan.com>]

At 19:53 25-04-2000 -0400, Michael D. Palage wrote:
>Some times you move so forward in a process that you may forget other
>potential solutions. So if there are any viable solutions that anyone has
>please offer them up.

Dear Michael:

A very good point.  As you know, in engineering we try to avoid "assumed 
restrictions" which are not restrictions at all.

[Let me correct my prior posting:  "Fictitious restrictions."]

[I got a U.S. patent around 1964 for a square petri dish.  All petri dishes 
had been round till then.  Mine had some additional features which 
permitted counting particles in stuff like liquid oxygen, missile 
propellant, hydraulic fluids -- and bedside water carafes in 
hospitals.  All because I broke out of the old fictitious restrictions of 
round petri dishes.]

Regards, BobC, who has no new ideas;-{   (But now does;-)

Let me expand on what I said before.  We've all been looking at that 
illusory *someone* to create a list.  Why not "self create* the list?

Let the IPR community post their own credentials.

Have someone review their submissions to see if they fit the objective 
criteria.

Let's establish the criteria along the lines of my prior proposal.

The point is to encourage the IP community to submit their own 
credentials.  Set up someone to evaluate those objective 
credentials.  Based upon the results, self selected trademark owners could 
register one domain for each confirmed "famous" trademark plus no more then 
five related terms.

Let each participant submit one of the following (to be determined):

1. List of issued trademarks in various territories per formula shown below.

2. documentary proof of issued trademarks in the Territories per formula 
shown below:

Along with the submission would be a fee -- $1,000 to $10,000.  These fees 
to pay for the clerical work to verify the submissions.

Now, which should it be, honor system or proof?    Under the honor system, 
applicants could lose their domains if they cheated.

Now to the criteria, my original posting and my present idea:

Begin quotation from Subject:  Re: [wg-b] Revised IPC Proposal
At 12:56 14-04-2000 -0400, Michael D. Palage wrote:

The most significant concern I have heard about having WIPO prepare a list 
of globally famous trademarks if that it could based upon subjective 
criteria.  Amounts amount of funds expended on advertising was suggested as 
one rather lose, un-auditable criterion I heard.   I propose that WIPO 
employ a quantifiable, objective set of criteria along the following lines:

I offer a counter proposal on which considerable effort has been expended 
in the past.  The very first iteration of the WIPO proposal which I saw in 
perhaps Feb or Mar of 1997 had an objective, quantifiable set of criteria 
-- the number of issued patents worldwide.

I therefore propose the following objective criteria for a globally famous 
trademark/service mark:

1. A minimum of X issued trademarks worldwide.  To be considered in these 
calculations, these marks would need to be at least one year old on 1 
January 2000.

2. Those trademarks to include at least Y each registered marks in 3 of the 
5 ICANN regions.

3. Those regional trademarks being issued in at least Z countries in the 
regions claimed in item 2, above.

I suggest that X>49, perhaps X>74

I suggest that Y>10

I suggest that Z>5

(It should be noted that there are about 50 countries in the AP 
region.  Five is a very small number.  Perhaps three would be adequate for 
North America, but all the other territories have large numbers of member 
states.)

end quotation:

Final evaluation:

I suggest X>74

I suggest that Y>10

I suggest that Z>3

end evaluation:

This morning/evening some of us agreed to the idea that there should be a list.

Some of us thought WIPO should not create the list.

Some were afraid that there would be complaints from those who did not make 
the cut.

My proposal leaves it to those who want to be on the list to apply.

My proposal gives them the means to opt to apply and the rules to "join the 
club".

Let's run it up the flagpole and see who is too  chicken to play the game.

BobC