RE: [wg-c] Re: One summary of NO voting rationals [PPC and Rita's]

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

> Behalf Of Eric Brunner
> Sent: Monday, December 20, 1999 6:22 PM
>

> I don't think the marks interests will pay their own freight,
> and the worth
> while of it all is up to them to define. I don't think there
> ever will be
> any marks money on the table for technology development.

You have finally said something that is 1) in the clear and 2) I can agree
with.

While this is more properly stated in WG-B, it bears repeating in both
places. Trademark-holders are responsible for policing their own marks, at
their own expense, by law. Exclusionary rules, famous marks or otherwise, do
the job for them. They should step up to the plate and cough up the dough to
fund such a system or learn to live without it. They should not burden the
rest of us with added costs because they don't want to pay for their own
system. It's like the CALEA provisions that the LEOs want, yet expect the
telcos to fund. It's beyond improper. In this case, the registries are
expected to support the process in their systems AND bear the liability and
court costs for the trademark-holders.