This posting is 'just in case' WIPO lose my comments:
World Intellectual Piracy
Organization - Comments on WIPO Interim Report (12 April 2001)
Emailing of interested
parties is merely a precautionary measure - in case WIPO loses their copy [I have
personal experience of UK Government department 'losing' evidence].
will judge for themselves, decide if the beliefs enclosed in this response and on
WIPO.org.uk are truth or hot air. You are welcome to try disproving these logical
findings. The USPTO and DoC could not.
Please concentrate on the points raised
- not the poor writing style. Do not be diverted from these points.
that which the authorities hide - the solution to trademark and domain name problems.
authorities and legal profession do not to want it solved, for reasons of money and
power - which is why I email interested parties.
The Internet is so important for
many things - including people getting their voice heard. This Interim Report is
for another small-minded, control-freakery, anti-libertarian policy, designed (amongst
other reasons below) to stop free speech.
Trademarks have ® symbol placed after
them for a reason. Why then, do they not use new TLD of .REG for this?
is warning, to advise the public that the mark is federally registered and their
use provides legal benefits - http://www.inta.org/basics/tmfaq.shtml#faq6
about trademarks 'raison d'être'? - Do you know what it is?
They are to identify
source - NOT to claim world rights to a word or words.
To use Attorneys words,
"The basic tenet of trademark law is to protect consumers and trademark owners from
confusion in the marketplace".
Most of the current problems are due to the authorities
perverted and twisted sense of protectionism towards big business trademarks.
trademarks share its name or initials with many others. When authorities could put
trademark identity beyond shadow of doubt, they are either devoid of intelligence
What other reason is there?
Brief comment on some of WIPO replies
Some give sycophantic congratulations on your success - do they mean
a) Usurping domain from the original legal owner?
b) Giving one
trademark holder dominance, over others with the same name?
Proprietary - Belonging
to a proprietor. Proprietor - An owner; one who has legal right to anything. So,
how can you legally stop anybody using these words?
Geographical - "Barcelona.com"
etc. The DNS is like a giant library index system. Do they claim I.P. rights and
royalties from books written about these places? They will be claiming I.P. rights
on maps next.
IGOs - Protection will only censor public criticism and allow them
to abuse power.
Personal Names - It is not justice that any one person has sole
right to use of a name. Out of principle, the reason I did not take GarryAnderson.com.
My name is as important to me, as yours is to you. I RECOGNISE that others may have
the same name as me - and that others may wish to make critical comment. There is
solution to the famous having own domain name.
Trade Names - More of the same.
Abuse of power - when you know the answer.
Main arguments are best summarized in
my response to Nominet UK. They are Registry for .uk Internet Domain Names. The Dispute
Resolution Service went under review.
Sent 30 March 2001 to Nominet UK:
World Intellectual Piracy Organization (WIPO.org.uk)
Response to Review
of Dispute Resolution Service
The WIPO represents just plain common sense and logical
intelligence on topic of Internet management. Ability further demonstrated on other
subjects at skilful.com (though you may not like what I say there) [skilful is proper
English spelling ;-) mentioned so that critics could not pass me off as somebody
of low intelligence (tried before)]. The following is considered and informed opinion
- after looking at all the facts. See if you agree with me.
WIPO is defending the
rights of domain owners worldwide. So obviously - not the same WIPO that is part
of UN just looking after big business (coincidentally paid by them). Though they
are certainly biased, I would not accuse them of being corrupt (with only circumstantial
This solution has been put to the United States Patent and Trademark
Office and Department of Commerce - during discussions neither could deny my assertions.
It was common sense that the authorities already must have known the simple logical
First, I wish to make comment on the response from IP Litigation Group
- Field Fisher Waterhouse, supporting ICANN's UDRP. There is so much I wish to say,
but will cut it very short.
To quote them, “As to the inconsistency of decisions
being handed down under the UDRP, it is still early days and, as more decisions are
made and precedents are adopted, the decision-making will become more uniform.”
[and read in context], “…we believe that trade mark protection is of paramount importance”,
they unashamedly admit their decisions are biased. This is nothing more than a confession
they are becoming more uniformly prejudiced.
A fact for you: domain names are not
trademarks - ask Paul Mockapetris, creator of Domain Name System.
However, as authorities
know, domain names could be made compatible with trademarks.
ICANN's UDRP has shown
this Dispute Resolution process is totally unworkable and unjust.
Though the authorities
SAY they have good ideals - to protect trademarks on the Internet - this is a barefaced
LIE. Only those unable to progress ideas through to conclusion would believe them.
only give certain trademarks an illegal dominant position and create a 'cash cow'
for their friends in the legal profession. This is demonstrably true and was the
obvious intention. Those in pocket of big business would say otherwise.
fail to realise, their domain could be victim of reverse hijacking by bigger business,
at any time in the future. They will never be safe, even after investing ALL into
their business - the most important part of their business, their identity, could
be stolen from them.
The only solution is to have restricted TLDs. For example,
Nissan cars tried to take nissan.com from Mr Nissan - it makes sense to reserve .car
TLD for carmakers - they can then use nissan.car. It has to be on a 'first come -
first served' basis.
There is one main cause for all these problems. The authorities
are deliberately managing the system so that domain names are not compatible to trademarks.
They do so for reasons based on money and power, without any sense of Justice. To
Nearly ALL trademarks share a common word(s) with many others - even in
same country. For example, in the dispute case of etoy and eToys (e prefix for Internet)
- 1,685 trademarks share common word "toy" in USA alone [879 live]. There are tens
of thousands of them in 200 other countries. Logical, therefore, that ALL cannot
use slight variations on this common word (as domain name) - else it would "infringe"
upon others and cause "consumer confusion".
Those with a brain can see, nearly
all domain names "infringe" upon others and cause "consumer confusion" - it is just
Making it worse still - they let only one of these businesses use
this common word - so ALL the others cannot. This is against "unfair competition"
laws. BUT, what makes it really bad - the authorities know the answer to avoid this
and are allowing businesses to break this law.
It gets even worse (is this possible?).
Though the naming system is not just for trademarks, authorities are taking these
common words from the legal owners. These people had the intelligence to buy these
common words first. The authorities and big business are stealing the “Intellectual
Property” of these individuals.
As shown, most trademarks cannot have their name
- so nearly ALL visitors are going to arrive at the wrong location and ALL get "confused"
anyway. So "consumer confusion" and "infringement" are just excuse, obvious lies,
used to take away the domain from legal owner. These are problems inherent in the
system - entirely the fault of authorities.
All these cases, in the courts and
before WIPO, are based on lies and propaganda. I am amazed so many intelligent people
have been taken in. [Obviously, some hide the lie - for self interest].
to note. They all do not want it solved; you will only see objections from them.
Even the ‘good guys’ (defending the little guy) are making a lot of money from these
disputes. Their arrogant refusal to publicly recognize mandatory requirements is
1 Trademark Name
4 Identifier - suggest Top Level Domain of .REG
The format for customer
to identify source (the reason for trademarks): name.class.country.reg
as certificate of authentication and directory - if you can use the telephone, then
you can use dot REG. Small businesses need not go broke buying hundreds of domains,
trying to protect every slight variation of trademark in every TLD [trademark tax].
business wants to use Name.com for advertising and marketing purposes on the Internet
- this is legal usage. To use it as currently used (to dominate over other trademarks),
is illegal usage. It requires class, country and identifier - i.e. Apple Computers
could use apple.tech.us.reg for trademark identity - using apple.com for marketing.
is logical, that they all are issued with a domain name with each trademark - in
format name.class.country.reg - the same as trademark rights issued.
be no restrictions put on a company whatsoever - they can use any number of .com/.biz
etc. domains - for advertising and marketing purposes.
There are laws in place
should Mr Nissan try to pass himself off as Nissan Cars on his nissan.com. Big business
is using Dispute Resolution to dominate this word space. Anyway, the consumer knows
it is not the car people - if they are not redirected to nissan.car.uk.reg.
are laws in place for libel should anyone make such unlawful remarks on any of these
sites. They object to any criticism and are using Dispute Resolution to abridge the
freedom of speech.
It is nothing complicated. Guardians of the Internet with all
your so-called experts, if you still do not understand, contact email@example.com
- I will draw you a picture. However, you knew all this already - or are you admitting
to gross incompetence?
The main reasons they want Dispute Resolution to go on:
Big business gets more power abusing their trademark.
2 Guardians of the Internet
get more importance.
3 Lawyers and trademark protection companies get rich.
Domain registration companies get rich from trademarks protecting mark.
businesses go broke with big business taking identity - less competition for them.
They muffle criticism of them - abridging the freedom of speech.
7 Kids (and grown-ups)
are stopped from making fan sites.
In conclusion, to reiterate - domain names are
not trademarks. Millions of TLD are possible. I call for Nominet UK to put pressure
on ICANN, first for the introduction of .REG to stop most of these problems. From
there, new restricted TLDs to stop other disputes, examples .CAR and .ACTOR - it
is just plain common sense.