[log in to unmask]" type="cite">Hello all,
Edward, allow me to contradict you regarding this statement:
"Domain names are not trademarks. Nor are they sui generis i.p. marks. To sign this letter indicates a belief that in some form they are and will make it a be a bit more difficult in the futre to coherently fight efforts by brand owners to further expand their monopoly rights in the domain ecosphere."
The best example I can give, is Amazon.com which is an actual trademark (Amazon with and without the dotcom; a list of their trademarks can be found here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/?nodeId=200738910)
This issue was discussed in one of our previous mailings regarding "generic" words, like fruits and everyday items.
Andrei Barburas
Community Relations Services Officer
International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD)
P.O. Box 11586, 2502 AN The Hague, The Netherlands
Mobile: +31 62 928 2879
Phone: +31 70 311 7311
Fax: +31 70 311 7322
Website: www.iicd.org
People ICT Development
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Edward Morris <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I would take exception to the claim that allowing so called "closed garden" gTLD's at all infringes upon nation states "entrenched legal processes" for obtaining trademark protection.
It's usually brand owners I need to remind of what appears to be a little recognized fact: domain names are not trademarks. Notwithstanding the fact that brand owners want us to treat domain names as trademarks +, that some UDRP mediators seem to buy this argument, that we're left fighting attempts to establish extraordinary protection for famous marks...
Domain names are not trademarks. Nor are they sui generis i.p. marks. To sign this letter indicates a belief that in some form they are and will make it a be a bit more difficult in the futre to coherently fight efforts by brand owners to further expand their monopoly rights in the domain ecosphere.
The concept of a commons in generic terms may be admirable. The concept stands alone and needs not and should not be linked to trademark rights. Regrettably the time to make such an argument with regards to this round of gTlds is in the past.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Kathy Kleiman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Hi All,
I would like to share with you a letter being circulated by Michele Neylon, the wonderful Blacknight registrar (and the only registrar in Ireland). It deals with new gTLDs that are "closed gardens" -- generic words that some companies have applied for as new gTLDs and will keep "closed" -- not open for general second-level domain name registration. These include some applicants for .BLOG and .CLOUD, among many others.
It's a powerful letter with strong free speech/freedom of expression arguments. Concerns are shared by registries, registrars and registrants -- and Michele is looking for Signatories.
Please take a moment to look at the letter, and let Michele know if you can sign on (name, organization). Michele is cc'ed on this email, and can be reached at [log in to unmask]
-----
Here's the full version with current signatories : https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZUNlookOWyaSW8lXfi_37zVFsVk9xcxncvmE0uwPEFY/editHere are two quotes from the
Here are two quotes from the letter:
"Based on our collective industry experience, we are of the opinion that the underlying intention of Section 6 was to allow for the operation of closed gTLDs only under very defined circumstances.
Specifically, that closed gTLDs should be reserved for only those strings in which the applicant possesses established (i.e., legally recognized) intellectual property rights, basically brand names. We believe that this interpretation of Section 6 is inherently logical especially in view of the discussions that preceded the opening of gTLDs -- which focused, in very large part, on expanding choices and opportunities as well as promoting innovation, for Internet consumers worldwide."
"Further, generic words used in a generic way belong to all people. It is inherently in the public interest to allow access to generic new gTLDs to the whole of the Internet Community, e.g., .BLOG, .MUSIC, .CLOUD. Allowing everyone to register and use second level domain names of these powerful, generic TLDs is exactly what we envisioned the New gTLD Program would do. In contrast, to allow individual Registry Operators to segregate and close-off common words for which they do not possess intellectual property rights in effect allows them to circumvent nation-states’ entrenched legal processes for obtaining legitimate and recognized trademark protections."
----
Best,
Kathy
Kathy Kleiman
Internet Counsel, Fletcher, Heald & Hildreth
Co-Founder, NCUC