Re: [wg-b] Protections for Noncommercial gTLDs.

["Martin B. Schwimmer" <martys@interport.net>]

The use and ownership of generalmotors.union by an entity not connected
with or endorsed by General Motors may  be held to be an infringing use.
Brach van Houten Holding v. Save Brach's Coalition, 856 F. Supp. 472, 31
USPQ2d 1786 (ND Ill 1994).




represent At 01:26 PM 4/16/00 -0400, you wrote:
>It is the position of Mr. Schwimmer that because Microsoft is a
>trademark name, no one can use the name of microsoft in the tile of a
>book, and charge money for it?  Could AOLSUCKS.COM be taken away if it
>was to solicit contributions to support its work?  Does he really think
>labor unions are just another corporate activity?
>
>And do proponents of greater freedom to use names have to provide legal
>briefs based upon US law to chip away at the new super trademark rigthts
>that would be created and enforced by ICANN, a "technical" organization?  
>And if the IPC proposal is based upon legal authority, why are they
>asking an NGO like ICANN to enforce thier "rights"?
>
>  Jamie  
>
>On Sun, 16 Apr 2000, Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
>
>> A>1)      The noncommercial gTLD is proposed by a registry should be
accepted 
>> >as a    noncommercial gTLD provided it does not seem outrageous on its
face 
>> >[.BIZ seems     commercial on its face and could be questioned.
.UNION, if 
>> >proposed as     noncommercial, appears to be noncommercial and has no
basis 
>> >for being questioned.]
>> >
>> 
>> 
>> If when asked to provide legal support for their position, advocates of
>> .union would actually do so, then this list would actually move forward,
>> not in circles.  Unions advertise and seek support for dues-paying members-
>> that is commercial activity.  For a company which contracts with multiple
>> unions, and for which there is comeptition to be a "recognized" union, then
>> ownership of or appearance on a website called generalmotors.union suggests
>> some type of conenction, endorsement or sponsorship by General Motors (all
>> other things being equal).
>> 
>> Please cite the caselaw that sets out the law of how a union may utilize
>> the name of an employer and explain how .union will abide by that law.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
>> 
>
>=============================================
>James Love, Consumer Project on Technology    
>P.O. Box 19367        | http://www.cptech.org 
>Washington, DC 20036  | love@cptech.org       
>Voice 202/387-8030    | Fax 202/234-5176     
>=============================================
>
>
>

@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @