Re: [wg-review] [Straw Poll Result] Consensus Building

["Chris McElroy" <watch-dog@inreach.com>]

With that being a seperate issue from IDNH hopefully and I agree 100%. It is
seconded.
Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sotiropoulos" <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>
To: <wg-review@dnso.org>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 4:57 PM
Subject: Re: [wg-review] [Straw Poll Result] Consensus Building


> 1/2/01 5:15:37 AM, "YJ Park" <yjpark@myepark.com> wrote:
>
> >Therefore, this result will be forwarded to NC  which let NC
> >consider further extension if it is necessary.
> >
> >Option A, Feb 20 : 8
> >Option B, March 4 : 10
> >Option C: 2
>
> This result clearly shows that a majority of those who publicly responded
to the poll, feel that an extension IS necessary.  It will be interesting to
see what
> the decision of the NC will be on this question.
>
> As for the issues at hand, I agree with the motion to quit discussion of
an ICANN dissolution and to focus on more practical suggestions and
> recommendations regarding the "Consensus Building" scope of this WG.
>
> It seems to me that one of the major points of discontent among many At
Large Members is the out of hand, matter-of-fact, conflation of trademarks
and
> domains.  This issue requires discussion and input from ALL stakeholders.
WIPO prerogatives and status within the DNSO and NC must be addressed.  I
> put forward a motion to ratify such a discussion within the scope of the
current Working Group on "Consensus Building".  Who stands for and against?
>
> Inclusion of Domain/Trademark issues in current WG?
> YES[  X ]
> NO  [     ]

With that being a seperate issue from IDNH hopefully and I agree 100%. It is
seconded if need be. I believe that was the reason for WG-B, but looking at
the decisions handed out by WIPO it was obviously not effective in
protecting Individuals from Reverse Domain Hijacking or from a much broader
protection for TMs than is allowed in a real court of law, which WIPO is
not. The nickname that has come to be associated with it is SWIPO. That is
how it is perceived. A change is in order and quickly before more rights are
taken away. Over 80% of decisions have gone for TM holders and against
Domain Name Holders. Thats Arbitration? Not. OK. I'll stop now.

Yes { X }

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

>
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>           Hermes Network, Inc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>