Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Poll-results update - Excel file this time
- To: gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Poll-results update - Excel file this time
- From: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 11:35:43 -0400
Similarly, Amadeu and Liz have not clicked on the doodle. Not that it
really is novel information gained or lost by the act, or the non-act.
Of the JN and FT proposals (and kudos to the marketeer who came up
with "Free Trade" over "Neo-Liberal" or "Keynes-is-Dead" choices), the
following are two-fers:
This removes some of the clarity.
Of course, the co-chairs would feel ignored if I didn't point out that
the JN and FT proposals share the amusing properties of both placing
trust in the very parties that trademarks holders have been the most
critical of over the past 15 years, and having an exemption for
applications by trademark holders. As intended, we've no way of
weighing working group participant views on policy choices for
standard and community-based applications, and are comparing apples
and apples plus some oranges.