<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: Re: [council] Current draft of Fadi's requested communication from council
- To: "Volker Greimann - Key-Systems GmbHz" <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Re: [council] Current draft of Fadi's requested communication from council
- From: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:53:08 -0700
- Cc: "Mason Cole" <mcole@xxxxxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx List" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <58AEC88C-8A50-4C3E-96A3-444E2875C692@key-systems.net>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: MailAPI 23514
Volker,
I will not argue with your metaphor -- I am quite fond of apples. But I do
quibble with you saying the strawman is "an expansion of the rights of a
trademark holder in the domain world." Trademark rights exist (not always
consistently) in all earthly realms. The strawman is not seeking to create new
ones, merely to create a method by which those that already exist can be
enforced.
Cheers,
Berard
--------- Original Message ---------Subject: Re: [council] Current draft of
Fadi's requested communication from council
From: Volker Greimann - Key-Systems GmbHz <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 2/12/13 4:25 pm
To: "john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Mason Cole" <mcole@xxxxxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx List"
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I think Fadi has made it very clear during the meeting in Amsterdam that he has
now understood the BC and IPC requests that led to the strawman as a second
bite of the apple, as he called it. The proposed contents of the strawman would
certainly constitute an expansion of the rights of a trademark holder in the
domain world. I therefore support sending the draft letter as is.
Sent from my iPad
On 13.02.2013, at 01:11, john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Mason,
Did I not suggest the "expansion of rights" language is a bit over the top?
Berard
--------- Original Message ---------Subject: [council] Current draft of Fadi's
requested communication from council
From: Mason Cole <mcole@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 2/12/13 3:00 pm
To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx List" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Council colleagues --
As you know, Fadi requested of the council its input regarding the strawman
proposal resulting from the BC's and IPC's request for additional RPMs in new
gTLDs. On December 27, I circulated an early draft of a council reply.
The communication is due very shortly, and has been taken up by a small group
within the council to ensure that all points of view are represented. Because
this is an agenda item for our meeting this week, at Maria Farrell's helpful
suggestion, I'm sending the current draft to council so we can be prepared to
discuss it then. This draft does not reflect additional input of the BC and IPC
-- if this is provided prior to the meeting, I'll be happy to forward it to the
council.
Thanks --
Mason
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|