Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: DaveKing2
Date/Time: Sun, October 21, 2001 at 5:52 AM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows NT 5.0
Subject: Agreed!

Message:
 

 
> there are thousands of bona fide people who want to run fan sites
> and information sites on favourite musicians or actors, and want
> a share of good-quality internet traffic.

Very true. In fact, Bruce Stringsteen recently lost the case against claiming *his* own domain because the site BruceSpringsteen.com was actually run as a legitimate fan site for him. In his case however, his name wasn't actually a registered trademark, just a 'common law' mark.

> The whole point about .INFO ... its distinctive identity, if
> managed well, which can make it different to .com and in many cases
> better... is that it is an amazing "INFORMATION" TLD for the
> WHOLE Internet community.

Yes, I actually prefer it to .com in many ways because it 'seems' so information focused rather than commercially based.

> Domain names are NOT trademarks.

Originally TM owners rightfully claimed back their TMs due to reasonable 'passing off' arguments (e.g. anyone using CocaCola.com but the Soft drink giant is obviously trying to pull the wool over Net Users' eyes). Everythig has become a lot more draconian since the Net has become so commercial and in many ways it's quite ludicrious that an Intellectual Property organisation such as WIPO, which is so obviously biased towards TM holders, should arbitrate on disputes.

Personally, I think all common dictionary words shouldn't have been claimable in the Sunrise process at all, regardless of whether a TM existed for them or not. This wouldn't have been particularly difficult to do from a technical perspective and would have been a lot more equitable for everyone in the long term.

Cheers,
Dave

 


Message Thread: