RE: [wg-b] RE: opportunity to pre-empt, or license to infringe?

[Ellen Rony <erony@marin.k12.ca.us>]

Marilyn Cade wrote:

>I agree with Steve's comments.  If someone is speculating in the trademarks
>of others, versus speculating in names not yet registered, or trademarked,
>the trademark holder has no choice but to protect their brand.  We can't
>merely sit by and allow infringements to occur.  Mechanisms which can
>prevent litigation should be viewed positively, since the need to engage in
>litigation will only delay e-commerce, add in unnecessary costs, and
>benefits no one.

If mere existence of a name constituted infringement, then all those with
identical trademarks would be infringing on the senior user of the mark.

Now, if you want to talk about true infringement, you have to look at HOW
the name is being used.  The character string is not enough to assume the
source for a particular class of goods and services in a system of global
commerce where so many duplications of a mark occur.

I personally think what is needed is serious re-education about how
vigorously owners of marks must police their use.  The mere registration of
a domain name or one that is 'confusingly similar' (one wonders how that
might be determined) to a mark should actually be exempt from policing
because it is doesn't examine contextual use.  IMHO.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Ellen Rony                    //          http://www.domainhandbook.com
Co-author                  *="  ____ /            erony@marin.k12.ca.us
The Domain Name Handbook      \     )                  +1  415.435.5010
                              //   \\             "Carpe canine"

          The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.