Re: [registrars] WG-B Idea - Thumbs up or Thumbs down

["Tom Barrett" <tom.barrett@netnames.com>]

I would think a waiting period would REDUCE litigation.  It would help catch
innocent infringement by a domain name applicant before the applicant
invested significant funds and energy in the name..

But the idea raises an interesting point.  I always thought the intent of
the various proposals was to protect two opposing camps: 1) existing
trademark owners from infringement or dilution and 2) domain name applicants
from selecting a name that someone else had prior rights to.  But so far,
the various proposals have focused on the rights of the first camp.

I wonder if new ideas would surface if we took the perspective of the second
camp--the applicant.  How do we prevent innocent domain name applicants from
putting themselves into a potentially litigious situation?  While UDRP
exists to handle disputes, are we putting into place the right checks or
systems to prevent disputes in the first place?

Tom




----- Original Message -----
From: Antony Van Couvering <avc@nameengine.com>
To: <mpalage@infonetworks.com>; Registrars@Dnso.Org <registrars@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [registrars] WG-B Idea - Thumbs up or Thumbs down


> Michael,
>
> Thanks for your note.  A waiting period of any length of time invites
> frivolous litigation and will have a chilling effect on domain name usage
> and purchase.  Also, unlike the sunrise period, it is continual, and there
> would be no getting back to "business as usual."  It is, in effect, a new
> layer of bureaucracy, and an expensive and litigious one at that.
>
> Antony
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> > Behalf Of Michael D. Palage
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 12:23 AM
> > To: Registrars@Dnso.Org
> > Subject: [registrars] WG-B Idea - Thumbs up or Thumbs down
> >
> >
> > Sorry for my quietness of late but I have been in Colorado at the
> > International Trademark Association. I have been pleasantly
> > surprised by the
> > number of ICANN registrars that have been in attendance. I almost
> > feel like
> > I am at an ICANN meeting.
> >
> > In light of the discussions last week about new ideas in additional to
the
> > two Sunrise Proposals (all trademarks v.s. famous trademark list) I have
> > been talking to the registrars in attendance about other potential
> > solutions. One of the ideas that surfaced is the following. A 30
> > day waiting
> > period after a domain name is registered before it is activated.
Therefore
> > there is no need for lists or sunrise periods.
> >
> > I know this idea has been discussed in the past, however, I believe it
is
> > important to leave no stone unturned and consider this proposal
> > in light of
> > what is currently transpiring.
> >
> > Yea or Nay?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > P.S. For those that have advocated the creation of a famous marks list,
> > based upon what I have heard in the rumor mill among the trademark
types,
> > the creation of such a list in the near foreseeable future (1-2
> > years) would
> > be highly unlikely.
> >
>