Re: [wg-c] Do we need a TM law modification?

["Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>]

On 30 July 1999, "Martin B. Schwimmer" <martys@interport.net> wrote:
>
>An alternative idea may be that if there were TLDs targeted at
>non-commercial use - there could then be a presumption that any use would
>not be infringing or diluting, and would not be admissible as evidence
>which goes to the strength of the mark.

There is.  Everything but .com and .net.

How about we turn the tables, unless there are more than 6 billion
TM holders:  We specifically designate certain TLDs to be specifically
and exclusively for commercial use.

Let's start with .com.  What about all the non-commercial folks there?
No problem.  We're expanding the namespace, so we offer them space in
another TLD.  They get first shot at the same SLD in the new TLD, for
example.

.net is trickier, since it's more likely to have non-commercial interests.

.org may have commercial interests.  They'd have to move.

Let's not get into the ccTLDs for the moment.

That just leaves the new gTLDs.  It would seem that the current figure
for "acceptable levels" of expansion is between 3 and 7 new gTLDs.
If we designated those as exclusively commercial, could we then please
have additional non-commerical (used in this case to mean: anything else --
individuals, non-profits, non-commericials, etc.) gTLDs?

-- 
Mark C. Langston	     			Let your voice be heard:
mark@bitshift.org				     http://www.idno.org
Systems Admin					    http://www.icann.org
San Jose, CA					     http://www.dnso.org