Re: [ga] poetry.org

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Now I'm really scared because I understood you. And have a response. If IP is a game, let's not allow that game to be played by different rules on the Internet than it is offline. Let's not change the rules so that the IP interests have more pull online than offline.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Hugh Dierker 
  To: kidsearch ; Richard Henderson ; General Assembly of the DNSO 
  Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 5:59 AM
  Subject: Re: [ga] poetry.org


  Gentlepersons,
  (or is that trademarked?)

  IP or sometimes known as "intellectual property" is not what you folks think it is.  Think a little more of our business world as a playground rather than a battle ground. Winners and losers are more akin to those with the most toys. TMs and copyrights are more about a powerplay than a Hamlet play. But it is all a chess play. The players are pieces to be moved by the thinker.
  You see anyone who jumps into the playing pool and makes the most waves wins the largest toy.
  Let me say it another way; Apple or Microsoft are words we can use in the playground of conversation. But we may not capitolise or capitalize or capitulate or capsulate them for profit. OTOH we can if we make so many stinking USD off them that we can buy them. Try monopoly. not the anti trade stuff but the game. Oooops we just violated another IP. But if i make enough money ( oops did i say "Money" another IP violation) i can earn the right or write to buy it. Take my name for instance. Ooops again, i did not mean "take it" i meant use it for the limitted or is that 'a limited" purpose of conversation.

  You see words are not taken. But stealing the hard work of another for a profit margin is taboo. You see i will never be sued for my use of words because i am a monk. i never take a dime from my use of them. *or is that a Monkey?*  OTOH in a former life i was an attorney and was basically paid for each word i used, but we have laws that protect that speech, or is that speach?

  Do not go off on a suit or suite regarding a name and it's uses. Stick to the intentions of the parties. If you intend to profit from the use of my name without my permission you are a fool. If you intend to profit off a trademark and you have not a big wallet you are an idiot. OTOH i profit in my own purse from the use of words. (look up Espanol- Bolsa)
  If you still do not get it, look up the last Columbian Lord of the Drugas who got litigated over the TM of Coca Cola. I do not think so. Nor will anyone trademark the word Genocide. Go for God.

  You must make yourself laugh over the worry of Poetry.org. Oh and by the way i am taking out Beverage and her sister More for Tequilla and Champagne for news years, not to be confused with the Western or go far enough Eastern Tet. Dang i think Dick Clark trademarked all that or Mexico or France.

  Now if you understood a word of that you are eligible to litigate TM law. Otherwise be very quiet on the subject and figure out first who was Plato and who was Socrates.

  e

  kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    I agree with you 100% Richard. It is very troubling. No trademark for the word poetry should have ever been issued in the first place. The USPTO is not supposed to allow trademarks on generic words and phrases according to their own rules. 

    An example: "Beverages and More" There was an attempt to register that as a mark. They were turned down properly, because it is too braod and generic. They ammended it to "Beverages & More!" and were granted the trademark for it to be written specifically that way.

    Then, the trademark holder took the owner of the domain name beveragesandmore.com and won in arbitration. They couldn't get the tm on it written that way, but they could take the domain name from it's current owner when it isn't actually represented by the mark they were granted by the USPTO.

    There is no reason that WIPO and the UDRP should be granting mark holders more autonomy on the Internet than they do offline. This is why I suggested specific categories for tlds at one point, so that nissan cars cannot sue the owner of nissan.grocrey or nissan.guitars, etc.

    Chris McElroy, President, 
    Kidsearch Network
    http://www.mostwantednewspaper.com



      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Richard Henderson 
      To: General Assembly of the DNSO 
      Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 10:54 AM
      Subject: Re: [ga] poetry.org


      This one disturbs me because I am the registrant of poetry.info and it highlights the way that the IP lobby acts in an overbearing way to reserve generic words from our language for itself. Why shouldn't other people run poetry websites or 'intend to run websites' or just choose a domain name for a website about poetry? Why should the commercial assume an auromatic first-claim ahead of the spiritual or artistic or personal?

      What gives IP claimants the right to reserve first claim on generic words from our language when new TLDs are released?

      How did it ever get to this point?

      Yrs,

      Richard Henderson
      http://www.poetry.info





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year.