Having watched the IOC exercise its IP rights in Canada I agree that the 
IOC and RC issues should be handled differently. In Canada the IOC 
tended to worry about “free loading” off of the IOC brand, and was 
overly aggressive toward ethnic mom and pop restaurants with “too 
Olympic sounding” business names, even if their existence predated the 
awarding of the 2010 Winter Games to Vancouver.  The IOC is not the RC 
and should be treated separately. [Oh! in a key Canadian case a family 
run Greek restaurant in Vancouver beat back legal attacks by the IOC]

Lori writes about finding the right balance of consumer protection and 
free speech. The protection being sought here is protection from fraud, 
and not simply from counterfeit products. I would understand this to 
mean the balance between protection from fraud and access to free 
speech, based on the wording of domain names, and not simply consumer 
protection as normally understood. We should not always just label 
ourselves consumers, we are more.

Sam L.

On 01/07/2014 2:09 PM, Lori Schulman wrote:
>
> I echo Evan’s sentiments.  I have been on the enforcement end of this 
> issue and it is a public threat with regard to fraud -- especially in 
> times of natural disaster.  Consumers are bilked out of millions of 
> dollars from very clever squatters.  Denying some extra measures of 
> protection do not necessarily help civil society when the 
> opportunities for fraud grow exponentially.    I think that having a 
> reasoned, balanced approach makes sense.   Separating IOC from RC also 
> makes sense because they are administered differently and there is a 
> different level of public interest involved.  While NCSG may disagree 
> with the current proposals for protection of IGO’s and NGO’s, I think 
> that there is room for meaningful compromise that achieves the balance 
> between consumer protection and concerns about overreaching on 
> intellectual property rights and inhibiting free speech.
>
> I think that it is worthwhile to note that trademark rights evolved 
> from concepts related to consumer protection.    I will be the first 
> to admit that brand owners frequently lose sight of that very 
> important fact and that there is IP overreach.  However, if we go back 
> to the root of the issue  and acknowledge that trademark rights were 
> implemented to protect consumers from fraud and confusion then we are 
> serving the public interest.   I believe that finding the right 
> balance of consumer protection and free speech is a core value of what 
> are trying to achieve on behalf of civil society and the name space.
>
> Lori
>
> *Lori S. Schulman*· General Counsel
> 1703 North Beauregard Street
>
> Alexandria, VA  22311-1714
>
> P 703-575-5678 · [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Description: cid:image001.png@01CC81E2.512C46F0
>
>

-- 
------------------------------------------------
"It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured
in an unjust state" -Confucius
------------------------------------------------
Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar)
Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3
email: [log in to unmask]   Skype: slanfranco
blog:  http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com
Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852