Re: [ga] A TLD for Trademarks

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Richard and all former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,

I can understand your frustration here.  The situation of a on the horns
of a dilemma properly express this conundrum.

However consider that .TM domain names are no more official than
.COM domain names of companies "officialdom" if you will as Domain
names are trademarkable in several countries including the USA regardless
of what name space they registered in. So to extrapolate that ONLY
domain names registered in .TM are "Official" is unlikely to ever to
actually come to pass.  This may or may not be a good thing, but
none the less the reality.  To change this now would represent a
restraint of trade that many companies would take ICANN to task
on and ICANN would loose that fight.

Richard Henderson wrote:

> I personally favour one clearly identifiable TLD for verified trademarks
> (call it .reg or .tm or whatever) and the whole world knows that's where you
> go to look for the official sites for recognised and established companies.
>
> For all the other TLDs you remove the sunrise rights and trademark rights.
>
> Companies who want to assert their trademarked identity, do so by publishing
> within .reg/.tm. They may also choose to acquire other TLD versions of their
> name and make them point to the .reg ending. The consumer, once educated,
> knows its the official site because it resolves to .reg.
>
> If it's not .reg, if it doesn't point to .reg and resolve to .reg, then it's
> not the official site.
>
> Of course, if someone acquires Pepsi.com and tries to pretend to be Pepsi,
> or defames Pepsi through it illegally, then by their illegal actions they
> should be pursued in the courts.
>
> But the Trademark lobby should stop trying to hijack 1000's of generic names
> which is our shared language. They should be herded up onto the .reg
> enclosure and that should be where they live!
>
> Where there are several companies in several countries using the same
> trademarked name, then the .reg registry should develop structures for
> handling that. But that problem of hundreds of 'Apple' trademarks around the
> world already exists at present and even the protective 'sunrise' mechanisms
> still hand out the domain name on what ends up as a first come first served
> basis.
>
> Domains should not be regarded as Trademarks. Except that in a designated
> .reg / .tm enclosure, they may be recognised as representations of
> trademarks.
>
> One day there will be 100's or 1000's of TLDs. Does Pepsi or Little Fred's
> Smalltime Corner Shop *really* want to buy their "Trademark" in every single
> one of those new TLDs?
>
> Only the registrars would really benefit from that... which is perhaps why
> ICANN and the DNS supply industry uphold the Trademark/Domain Name myth.
>
> Yrs,
>
> Richard H
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 2:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [ga] A TLD for Trademarks
>
> > Chris,
> >
> > Thank you for your comments.  When we start coming to
> > conclusions about different possible TLD applications
> > (such as .trademark or a .xxx -- both of which can
> > raise the hackles of certain individuals) we are
> > utlizing selection criteria.
> >
> > That is what this whole week's discussion exercise has
> > been about.  What differentiates a successful TLD
> > application from one destined to failure?  What
> > criteria are new TLDs expected to meet?
> >
> > Unless we want an arbitrary and capricious selection
> > process for new gTLDs, we need to settle on the
> > selection criteria that applicants will need to meet.
> >
> >
> >
> > --- kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't think they need that Danny. First of all,
> > > domain names were never
> > > meant to represent trademarks.
> > >
> > > When you register a trademark, you have to specify
> > > the field that the
> > > trademark will be used in, such as "entertainment
> > > television show" "clothing
> > > and apparel" "automobiles", etc.
> > >
> > > A trademark gives you permission to use the chosen
> > > word or phrase to market
> > > your particular product. It does not give one
> > > ownership of that string of
> > > letters.
> > >
> > > An example "Nissan". You can argue all you want
> > > about famous marks, but if
> > > my name is Nissan and I want Nissan.tshirts as my
> > > domain in the tshirt tld,
> > > I not onle have the right to own that domain name,
> > > but I can also register a
> > > trademark, because it will not be in the same
> > > category as the automobile
> > > manufacturer's trademark.
> > >
> > > The simplest way to protect people's trademarks is
> > > to allow the creation of
> > > all types of tlds. So Nissan.auto or Nissan.car if
> > > registered by anyone
> > > other than Nissan, the automobile manufacturer,
> > > would easily be recognized
> > > as a trademark infringement, whereas Nissan.guitars
> > > would not be. There is
> > > also something to be said for car lots to be able to
> > > register the domain
> > > names Nissan.car or Nissan.auto if they sell Nissan
> > > cars. That is also not a
> > > trademark infringement IMHO.
> > >
> > > By creating specific tlds, it would be easy to
> > > protect your mark without
> > > giving trademark holders ownership of entire strings
> > > of letters that even a
> > > trademark does not give you legally.
> > >
> > > Trademark enforcement has been implemented on the
> > > Internet more stringently
> > > than it ever was pre-Internet. The USPTO only gives
> > > you "permission" to
> > > "use" that string of letters relating to marketing
> > > your product in a
> > > "specific" geographical area and it limits it to a
> > > specific category of
> > > product.
> > >
> > > When you apply for the mark, the contract does not
> > > say you "own" the string
> > > of letters. Nowhere in the USPTO agreement does it
> > > also guarantee you all
> > > domain names that contain that string of letters.
> > >
> > > Again, a phone book approach or a USPTO category
> > > approach to tlds would
> > > suffice to protect the "limited" rights that mark
> > > holders have.
> > >
> > > .printers .pcs .stereo .cars .clothing,.etc. and
> > > ICANN doesn't need to set
> > > this up. Let the market do the talking. If there is
> > > a need for .cars and
> > > others, someone will create it and it will take care
> > > of trademark protection
> > > all by itself. Only famous marks would be protected
> > > in .com, .net, .org and
> > > other generalized tlds. All trademark holders would
> > > be protected in the tlds
> > > that are specific to the categories they hold marks
> > > for.
> > >
> > > Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
> > > http://www.WhoLetTheBlogOut.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 2:20 PM
> > > Subject: [ga] A TLD for Trademarks
> > >
> > >
> > > > Interesting.  In support of a TLD for trademarks
> > > --
> > > > From Frederic Wallenberg's "Short Paper 2":
> > > >
> > > > Excerpt:  "I will first describe my general
> > > solution
> > > > to the issue at hand and will thereafter look at
> > > > special considerations for famous marks. My
> > > solution
> > > > relies on four changes. First I will propose a
> > > change
> > > > to the domain name system to accommodate all
> > > trademark
> > > > holders. For this change to be useful, we need to
> > > make
> > > > changes to the domain name server infrastructure
> > > and
> > > > change some functionality in the browsers used by
> > > web
> > > > users. This change in turn will require some
> > > change in
> > > > user behavior to be effective. While the solution
> > > > isn't without cost, it does have the opportunity
> > > to
> > > > solve the problem we're currently facing.
> > > >
> > > > Changes to the Domain Name structure
> > > >
> > > > The main idea is to allow all legitimate trademark
> > > > holders (under any legal regime) to secure their
> > > > trademark as a second level domain. To facilitate
> > > this
> > > > on a worldwide basis, it would be desirable to
> > > have
> > > > one unique TLD for trademarks."
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~fredrik/courses/cyberlaw/A%20New%20DNS.pdf
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > protection around
> > > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827