Re: [wg-b] Re: ICANN's Mandate

[eileen kent <eileenk@enteract.com>]

 It is appropriate for ICANN to advise Congress with respect to domain
names and trademark issues.
How does putting trademark issues on the agenda equate to writing trademark
statutes? It's your inference, but it's a mighty big leap from what he
actually said.

Eileen Kent

At 08:56 PM 10/8/99 -0700, d3nnis wrote:
>Mike Roberts Wrote:
>
><snip>
>>The USG White Paper, which is ICANN's chartering policy document,
>> clearly puts trademark issues that intersect with the Domain Name
>> System on our agenda.
>
><snip>
>
>Surely you don't contend that  Congress transferred its power to write
>trademark statutes to the Department of Commerce, which then passed
>it to ICANN?  Or do you?
>
>
>>Dennis Schaefer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>