RE: [wg-c] Application Requirements

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

Actually, this argument, of Walsh's, is somewhat irrelevant. USPTO did
reverse position (which Wlash failed to contest) and this constitutes a risk
that prior trademarks, even common law marks, were effected by the decision
and could claim a grandfather clause exemption from the new rulings.
Granted, such a case would have to be argued in court. This would be a case
by case argument and IANAL (Don't wanna be either, dot-com architect is *so*
much more lucrative <g>).

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-wg-c@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-c@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Mikki
> Barry
> Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2000 7:06 PM
> To: William X. Walsh
> Cc: Roeland M. J. Meyer; wg-c@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [wg-c] Application Requirements
>
>
> At 4:52 PM -0800 3/26/00, William X. Walsh wrote:
> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >Hash: SHA1
> >
> >
> >On 27-Mar-2000 Roeland M. J. Meyer wrote:
> >  > What is also at issue is the fact that many SLDs, and a
> few TLDs, were
> >  > granted trademark status.
> >
> >You apparently missed the part where I said that no TLDs were
> >granted trademark
> >status.  Not a single one.   Everyone attempt has been
> rejected by the USPTO
> >even before these policies were in place.
>
> This is not true.  Several were indeed issued.  Here is one:
>
> Typed Drawing
>
>   Word Mark
>                           .XXX
>   Goods and Services
>                           IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: registration
> services, namely, assigning and recording addresses for computers on
> a public global
>                           communications network, and dispute
> administration services, namely, arranging for dispute resolution
> processes to settle disputes over
>                           conflicting addresses for computers on a
> public global communications network
>   Mark Drawing Code
>                           (1) TYPED DRAWING
>   Serial Number
>                           75225757
>   Filing Date
>                           January 14, 1997
>   Files ITU
>                           FILED AS ITU
>   Published for Opposition
>                           May 19, 1998
>   Owner
>                           (APPLICANT) A Technology Company Inc.
> CORPORATION CANADA 18 King Street East Suite 1505 Toronto, Ontario
> CANADA
>                           M5C 1C4
>   Section 44 Indicator
>                           SECT44
>   Priority Date
>                           November 25, 1996
>   Type of Mark
>                           SERVICE MARK
>   Register
>                           PRINCIPAL
>   Live/Dead Indicator
>                           LIVE
>