[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [wg-b] Reality checks [the grateful dead(hits)]
For the sake of completeness, I would add that I can find nothing improper
on the face of it with Porsche objecting to porschebank.com or
porschelynn.com, or the Academy objecting to theoscars.com. Nothing in these
domain name is a clear message.
Steve Hartman
Nabisco, Inc.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hartman, Steve
> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 1999 12:51 PM
> To: 'erony@marin.k12.ca.us'; wg-b@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [wg-b] Reality checks [the grateful dead(hits)]
>
> I believe it is reasonable to exclude those domain names that contain the
> string "oreo," the string is not part of another word (eg, choreography)
> and the domain name does not immediately and directly communicate a clear
> message. On that basis, I would exclude all of the domain names listed
> below. None of the domain names cited, in my view, have a communicative
> value greater than the potential for confusion or mistake or misuse. I do
> not accept the slippery slope argument. That does not mean that there are
> domain names that are "hard cases, " but they can and should be handled on
> an individual basis, probably by the courts, precisely because they are
> close cases that require careful balancing of rights.
>
> Steve Hartman
> Nabisco, Inc.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: erony@marin.k12.ca.us [SMTP:erony@marin.k12.ca.us]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 1999 11:44 AM
> To: wg-b@dnso.org
> Cc: Hartman, Steve
> Subject: RE: [wg-b] Reality checks [the grateful dead(hits)]
>
> Steve Hartman wrote:
>
> >I am not sure of the point you are making. Obviously, if oreo.com
> is
> >excluded, then so should oreos.com and other non-material variants.
> I don't
> >consider the line between ihateoreos.com, on the one hand, and
> oreo.com and
> >its non-material variants to difficult to draw.
>
> You are describing both extremes of the spectrum, but what about
> those
> variants that are less obvious? MyOreos? iOreos? Oreos2K?
> Oreos4us?
> OreosNMore? PlanetOreos? It's a slippery slope.
>
> Take a look at the Porsche suit to see a list of variants (129 of
> them)
> that the trademark owner thought should be excluded. It includes
> PorscheBank and PorscheLynn (an adult movie star).
>
> Or the suit filed by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences
> which
> listed theoscars.com as one of the domain names it challenged.
> Would that
> be "the Oscars" or Theo's Cars?
>
> Indeed, a slippery slope.
>
>
> Ellen Rony
> Co-author
> The Domain Name Handbook ____
> http://www.domainhandbook.com
> ======================== ^..^ )6
> =============================
> ISBN 0879305150 (oo) -^-- +1 (415)
> 435-5010
> erony@marin.k12.ca.us W W
> Tiburon, CA
> Dot com is the Pig Latin of the Information Age.
>