Rapid Suspension System.
Ladies and gentlemen, please consider what you are contemplating with this rapid suspension proposal. As with any new program, there is always the potential for abuse. While we understand that cybersquatting and trademark infringement is a serious issue, there are already fair and equitable policies and LAWS that allow trademark holders to remedy any violations and punish violators. Is there going to be a monetary penalty to thwart would be abusers from attempting to shut down legitimate sites if they lose thier case? If somebody has an english word parked and there are ads relaitng to dictionary definitions of that word, but some trademark holder wished he had the traffic because his TM is similar to that word, are you going to take an english word away yet again. The UDRP in its current form is fair and equitable, as far as the process goes. Remember, we are trying to stop blatant offenders. What you are proposing can open up a pandoras box of blatant offenses from the other side, at the cost of innocent parties. I own smashed.com. I have had it for some time. It is a simple word. So is the band smashingpumkins, smashmouth, or worse yet, there is a movie in the works called *Smashed*, and will the owners of these entities simply make a request to shut down my site cause we share a common commercial interest in useing various forms of the word SMASH. Have you ever heard of Due Process? Have you ever heard the phrase innocent until proven guilty? What is wrong with this is that you are now proposing to presume guilt without due process, and Im telling you people are going to be wrongly accused, and they will be financially harmed, and their reputations may be damaged, and Im telling you, if it happens to me I will hire the best attorneys in the world make sure I am compensated for all the damage. Yes, Icann will be sued, as what you are proposing to do is circumvent due process and usurp the powers that the american people have provided granted to the US government. It is very close to a violation of free speech when you tell the owner of KNOT.com that even though the definition of the word KNOT is *a bond, especially the marriage bond*, you proceed to take that name from him for providing links to marriage related goods and services. UDRP did just that, but at least he had a chance to argue his point, that the use of the word in relation to its definition should be protected, even if the comapany who chose "THE KNOT" as thier trademark was intentioanlly trying to capitalize on a centuries old association of a word and marriage. That is wrong to give them ownership of the word and not allowing anybody else to use it in trealtion to its definition. But it happened. Thats like saying I cant use the word Apple to sell fruit cause somebody set of a fruiit stand called Apples. So no. You absolutely need to allow due process period. Now Im going to give you an example why. I own the domain anme SqueezeBox.com A short while ago, I was approached by a representative of Logitech, a company that makes peripheals. They have a device called a SqueezeBox music player. They have a trademark for it. They are a 2 billion market cap aompany and nopw they want my name and I declined to sell it to them. Now I knwo I cant sell music players or put up a website thats related to MP3s or streaming music. They have succesfully gained exclusive rights to that use. But, look at my site www.squeezebox.com, and tell me, if Logitech should request to shut my site down, are you going to do so just because of the request and they have a TM, and ignore the fact that there is no trademark violation, ignore the fact that a *squeezebox* is a device that plays music and is also called an accordian, that there is a band called Squeezebox that play what? Music, and ignore the fact that squeezebox.comwas registered long before logitech bought the company that makes the squeezebox player. A SqueezeBox (accordian) has been associated with music for ever it seems, yet, the USPTO now hands the right to use the phrase squeezebox in relation to music over to Logitech. What, we cant call accordians squeezeboxes anymore? Are you going to allow them to shut my site down if they request it? I want to know the answer to that. If it happens, somebody is going to owe me a lot of money. So you had better not allow a simple request to be the only criteria. We need due process. We are innocent until proven guilty. -- John W McKanna Nexcorp LLC of Illinois 815-955-9909