Return to newtlds Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: mkpage
Date/Time: Mon, July 10, 2000 at 7:54 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.0 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: SBLC comments on Famous Trademark Protection

Message:
 

 
        The Small Business Legislative Council (SBLC) is a permanent, independent coalition of nearly 80 trade and professional associations that share a common commitment to the future of small business.  Our members represent the interests of small businesses in such diverse economic sectors as manufacturing, retailing, distribution, professional and technical services, construction, transportation, and agriculture.  Our policies are developed through a consensus among our membership.  Individual associations may express their own views.

SBLC does not believe the proposal under consideration of Working Group B on the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) adequately balances the concerns of small business with the issue of famous trademark protection.  In general, SBLC agrees with the comments espoused by the Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy.  The Office of Advocacy's alternatives to the current proposal include:

"The first alternative is to introduce a large number of new gTLDs. This expansion of the name space will provide alternative names to businesses and diminish the value of cybersquatting. With each new gTLD, the ability for any cybersquatter to extort payment from a particular trademark holder diminishes. Furthermore, as new gTLDs are introduced to the Internet, consumers will become aware that a .com Web site is different than a .biz Web site, lessening confusion. This alternative is especially attractive because of the need for new gTLDs that currently exists and the opportunities such an expansion will bring to small businesses. The total number of gTLDs ultimately introduced must be high for this alternative to work effectively. The introduction could be measured and at a reasonable pace but must be continual and limited only by what the market will bear."

"The second alternative is to create a chartered gTLDs for use by trademark holders. This gTLD could be called .fame or .tmk. It’s charter would allow all registered trademarks to register within it. This insures that trademarks would have the domain name of their choice, assuming that another trademark holder did not register it first."

"The third alternative is a variation of the modified sunrise proposal. Under this alternative, the holder of a registered trademark could register the name identical to its trademark during the sunrise period for a chartered gTLD whose charter corresponds to that trademark’s international class of industry and service. This means that a the sunrise registration would only apply to chartered gTLDs and that only those trademarks whose class of industry or service corresponds with that charter could register during the sunshine period. Furthermore, the holder may register the domain name identical to the trademark – no variations. There would be no sunshine period for unrestricted gTLDs and gTLDs whose charter does not correspond with a class of industry."

SBLC asks that the working group does not adopt the modified sunrise proposal.  Rather, we believe the adoption of one of the three alternatives proposed by the Office of Advocacy would better reflect the interests of small business.

Sincerely,

Matthew K. Page
Director, Legislative Affairs
Small Business Legislative Council       
     
     

 

Link: SBA Office of Advocacy Comments


Message Thread:


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy