|
In the course of the Working Group B's efforts to reach
consensus on what protections should be afforded the holders of "famous" names, attention
has been drawn to a recent proposal of the Intellectual Property constituency (IPC).
The proposal, described in the DNSO Working Group B Interim Report (April 17, 2000)
would in effect grant all holders of trademarks and service marks with the opportunity
to participate in a "sunrise" period before a new name is opened to the general public.
This stance would appear to sidestep many of the difficult issues under debate, and
it has found support in both the Registrar and Intellectual Property constituencies.
I am opposed to the proposal and urge members of the Names Council to consider it
with reservation and caution. While the proposal would at first glance seem to be
a straightforward and practical solution to the issue of trademark protection during
the test period for new names, I would like to point out what I believe to be a significant
point of concern. The proposal as described in the Interim Report would, if carried
out, introduce a tremendous bias towards U.S. and Western firms. Most holders of
U.S. trademarks are, not surprisingly, U.S. firms. The implementation of the proposal
or some close variant thereof would result in Western firms' ending up with the lion's
share of the good, commercially valuable names, seriously disadvantaging non-U.S.
businesses and interests. Such a bias goes against the international spirit of the
internet as envisioned by Jon Postel, and it does not do justice to ICANN's ostensible
role as global steward of the internet domain naming system. Thus, it is my opinion
that the Names Council must consider alternatives other than that of a sunrise period
for all trademark holders in order to forge a truly global compromise to the issue
of famous names protection.
|
|
|