Slashdot Mirror

Corrupt ICANN and the authorities have always known the answer for authenticating registered trademarks e.g. barclays.bank.uk.reg

So user could enter this URL directly or barclays.co.uk could be redirected to this as certificate of authentication.

Obviously, this would work for all other trademarks in other goods or service (called classification) e.g. apple.computer.us.reg

Please visit http://wipo.org.uk/ - not connected with the crooks at UN's WIPO.org ;)

Corrupt ICANN and the authorities have always known the answer for authenticating registered trademarks e.g. barclays.bank.uk.reg

So user could enter this URL directly or barclays.co.uk could be redirected to this as certificate of authentication.

Obviously, this would work for all other trademarks in other goods or service (called classification) e.g. apple.computer.us.reg

Please visit http://wipo.org.uk/ - not connected with the crooks at UN's WIPO.org ;)

Corrupt ICANN and the authorities have always known the answer for authenticating registered trademarks e.g. barclays.bank.uk.reg

So user could enter this URL directly or barclays.co.uk could be redirected to this as certificate of authentication.

Obviously, this would work for all other trademarks in other goods or service (called classification) e.g. apple.computer.us.reg

Please visit http://wipo.org.uk/ - not connected with the crooks at UN's WIPO.org ;)

Trademark Law is UNAMBIGUOUS - a mark is allowed for SPECIFIC goods or service ('class') in SPECIFIC countries.

Please visit my site - http://wipo.org.uk/

Site is nothing to do with corrupt people at UN WIPO.org ;-)

The authorities will pretend they do not know what the 'e' in 'email' means next.

Everybody here knows that the prefix 'i' in 'itunes' is for the Internet.

Guess why nobody is allowed to trademark the word 'tunes' or 'music' for the same purpose.

The Patent Office should not have allowed it - they are clearly corrupt.

The evidence of corruption is described on http://wipo.org.uk/

Repeat - "Many businesses share the same name as others" - this is in every country.

If you read the http://wipo.org.uk/ website you will see.

There is no trademark infringement - clearly a case of trademark overreach.

Many businesses share the same name as others.

It tells you everything on http://wipo.org.uk/

UN WIPO are biased - even the USPTO admit this.

Quote: Lois Boland, director of international relations for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, said that open-source software runs counter to the mission of WIPO, which is to promote intellectual-property rights.

"To hold a meeting which has as its purpose to disclaim or waive such rights seems to us to be contrary to the goals of WIPO," she said.

http://www.detnews.com/2003/technology/0308/22/tec hnology-250851.htm

This is not only in relation to open-source software but also with domain names in their UDRP.

The informed /.er will know this is the rules they made to help corporations overreach with their trademarks.

There is no doubt in my mind - the people at WIPO are corrupt.

Please visit http://wipo.org.uk/ - nothing to do with the United Nations WIPO.org !

Those that think it cybersquatting - obviously do not have a clue of what they are talking about.

Or are informed lawyers being paid to act dishonestly for corrupt overreaching corporate trademark holders in another case.

www.WIPO.org.uk
World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not associated with corrupt UN World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO.org)

Perhaps lawyers and judges should be more concerned with how the Law is being violated by trademark holder to .

For example - the overreaching of trademark rights against tribute or criticism sites - to bully the law abiding registrant of domain.

Please check out court case in America - lucasnursery.com:

The U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that this domain did not violate the law when female owner used the name of Lucas Nursery for a Web site she created to complain about them.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

Here is another:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

www.WIPO.org.uk
World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not associated with corrupt UN World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO.org)

Quote from CNN article:

Lamparello's site criticizes Falwell's stance against homosexuality and includes a disclaimer that reads, "This Web site is not affiliated with Jerry Falwell Ministries."

THEREFORE THIS WAS CLEARLY FREE SPEECH

Perhaps the Judge is ignorant old duffer - or may be he is of the same opinion as Falwell.

Please read lucasnursery.com decision of the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals - it ruled that this domain did not violate the law. The female owner used the name of Lucas Nursery for a Web site she created to complain about them.

Link

Or this quote from trendmakerhome.com court decision:

"Concluding that Maxwell's site, as a non-commercial gripe site, violates none of these statutes, we reverse and render judgment in favor of Maxwell."

Link

Please visit my complaint site to find out more of this subject.

N.B. It is not associated with corrupt UN World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO.org)

1 - virtually every word is (or can be) registered as a trademark many times over by different type of business in the same or a different country e.g. the word 'apple' is registered by tobacco and computer companies in the US.

Every domain you pick will likely be similar to a registered trademark - you would think that authorities want people to know which domains belong to a registered trademark.

Even UN WIPO will not guarantee that your domain is safe - even if you check all their sources: "any searches using the links provided on this site will not be sufficient to determine definitively whether or not the domain name is infringing."

2 - the only way to avoid confusion with ordinary domain names is to have some sort of identifier to identify them - to replace registered trademark symbol (R) - like a protected .reg TLD.

e.g. apple.com could be directed to apple.computer.us.reg - who else could it be? (format: name.classification.country.reg)

This adds unequivocal trademark identification and directory functionality - with absolutely no restrictions or requirement to lose current domains.

I believe the evidence provides conclusive and demonstrable proof that the authorites are corrupt - they aid and abet trademark overreach. This can be shown in UDRP cases when the term could LEGALLY be used by any number of businesses (with or without trademark) - or for personal none comercial use.

UDRP rules (on which decisions are based) wrote by WIPO - is a biased system that favours trademarks to promote intellectual-property rights.

Even U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recognizes and admit this bias. They identified it when talking about open-source software:

Lois Boland, director of international relations for the USPTO, said "that open-source software runs counter to the mission of WIPO, which is to promote intellectual-property rights." "To hold a meeting which has as its purpose to disclaim or waive such rights seems to us to be contrary to the goals of WIPO."

With all words registered for trademarks, you could imagine them saying, "to allow others to use words runs counter to the mission of WIPO, which is to promote intellectual-property rights." "To give people domain names is to disclaim or waive such rights seems to us to be contrary to the goals of WIPO."

Do you know Trademarks 'raison d'etre'?

"They are to identify source - NOT to claim world rights to a word or words."

WIPO.org.uk - Comments on WIPO Interim Report (12 April 2001) to UN WIPO.

Garry Anderson - Haverhill UK - Home Page - WIPO criticism.

FACT: Virtually every word is (or can be) registered trademark - there is BOUND TO BE CONFUSION WITH DOMAIN NAMES.

OBVIOUSLY - trademarks have to be identified on the Internet - just like they are in the real world.

There is a solution - use a protected TLD (e.g. .reg) to identify registered trademarks.

Just like people in US know .gov site is US government site - and those in UK know .gov.uk is UK government site.

The authorities know this but would rather aid and abet big business unlawfully overreach with their trademarks.

Please visit my web site - not associated with corrupt UN World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO.org).

UN WIPO experts said they do not know the solution to trademark conflicts with domain names.

These people lied - the answer was self-evident and has been ratified by honest lawyers.

Virtually every word is (or can be) registered as a trademark many times over by different type of business in same or different country e.g. the word 'apple' is registered by tobacco and computer companies in the US.

The only way to avoid confusion with ordinary domain names is to have some sort of identifier to identify them - to replace registered trademark symbol (R) - like a protected .reg TLD.

Just like only US government departments can get .gov domain - only registered trademarks can get a .reg domain.

All registered trademark words can be uniquely identified by name.classification.country.reg - e.g. apple.computer.us.reg

Apple Computers can still use apple.com - just directed to apple.computer.us.reg as certificate of authentication and use as directory.

Please visit my site - Not associated with UN World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO.org).

Quote: Lois Boland, director of international relations for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, said "that open-source software runs counter to the mission of WIPO, which is to promote intellectual-property rights." As she is quoted as saying, "To hold a meeting which has as its purpose to disclaim or waive such rights seems to us to be contrary to the goals of WIPO."

I have long held the informed opinion that the people within UN WIPO are corrupt - it is why I have this website.

My logic is proven - not one lawyer has been able to give argument against the facts. These people at UN WIPO have no honour - they are too cowardly to answer my charges.

People have every right to use words for whatever legal reason they wish - true or false?

UN WIPO made rules that abridge peoples rights to choose words on the Domain Name System - words that are not used for any unlawful purpose.

Fact 1 - a trademark is allowed for SPECIFIC goods or service ('classification') in SPECIFIC country. UN WIPO aid and abet corporations to overreach their trademark rights on the Internet - violating Trademark and Competition Law.

UN WIPO, together with ICANN, the US Department of Commerce (also Patent and Trademark Office) actually help corporations violate the First Amendment rights of US citizens.

The Council of Europe should make it a legal requirement that individuals HAVE TO REPLY to criticisms on these sites.

That is part the reason why some people make (company)sucks.com sites - because sometimes these cowards in corporations will not answer justified criticism.

I have been waiting for years for the answers to some simple questions from people in the United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

It is my informed opinion that they and others in ICANN are corrupt.

UN WIPO and ICANN help big business violate Trademark and Antitrust Law using the Domain Name System.

They also violate the First Amendment. As you know - people have every right to use words for whatever legal reason they wish. UN WIPO and ICANN seem to think they do not have this right - they abridge the words that people can use.

Please visit my site - not connected with the crooks at WIPO.org ;-)

Firstly, I presume you know where ICANN money is going - to their Lawyers, JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE.

Next - I have no doubt that ICANN are corrupt - that they violate Trademark and Competition Law with Sunrise Process and UDRP.

Fact: They know how to identify all registered trademarks on the Internet - yet hide this.

The solution has been ratified by honest lawyers.

More facts for you:

You can legally use any word, words or initials to start a new business without registering a trademark - providing you are not passing off, of course.

Take for example the word 'apple'. It is legally used by thousands of businesses - large and small all over the world. Indeed, it is impossible that they all register themselves as trademarks - they are bound to conflict with many others, being confusingly similar. In my local phone book alone, there are at least five using this word - two garages (seems not connected), a car centre, fruit growers and a decorating firm.

It is trademark overreach to prevent all these businesses from using their name in commerce.

Also - why prevent people using any words for personal sites? Everybody has legitimate rights to use ANY words for ANY legal purpose they wish - true or false?

Trademark Law is UNAMBIGUOUS - a mark is allowed for SPECIFIC goods or service ('class') in SPECIFIC country.

A protected TLD could identify all registered trademarks - like the symbol of a R in circle - ®

Most businesses share the same trademark word with others e.g. Apple is used by tobacco and computer company.

Which do you think is Apple Computers website in the US - if .reg was introduced?

apple.tobacco.us.reg
apple.computer.us.reg

Therefore, apple.com could be directed to apple.computer.us.reg to serve as certificate of authentication and fuction as directory.

Please visit my protest site - not connected with the corrupt United Nations WIPO.org.

c. Something tangible or intangible to which its owner has legal title: properties such as copyrights and trademarks.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=property

The rights to use a domain name can be transfered to another. It is obviously property - it does not take a Judge to work that one out.

It will be a corrupt legal system that lets Verisign, et al., off the hook for mismanagement.

P.S. The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO.org) told a LIE when they said there is no solution to trademark and domain name problem. The answer was ratified by honest attorneys and it is indisputably self-evident. Please visit World Intellectual Piracy Organization to see.

Quote from the U.S. Defense advanced Research Projects Agency:

"The goal of the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program is to revolutionize the ability of the United States to detect, classify and identify foreign terrorists -- and decipher their plans -- and thereby enable the U.S. to take timely action to successfully preempt and defeat terrorist acts."

They want to, quote: "identify foreign terrorists" - what rubbish. They KNOW you are American citizen, not even a suspect foreigner - yet want to know what you buy, where you travel - everything. They want to profile you, like a criminal. I find it hard to believe that U.S. politicians are that dumb - to go along with this violation of the American Peoples Rights. Looks like TIA initials stand for Totally Ignorant Acceptance (of propaganda).

I have said this many times - and have yet to hear reasoned argument against it:->

Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught!

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - Meet you in the pub Monday (meaning, human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet Protocols.

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".

This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).

This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.

So what was their crime, to deserve this investigation?

It was just for showing up members of government to be the incompetents they were.

As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to use this information as propaganda - to smear the character of these good People.

Our honourable government would rather defile the character of its citizens - rather than address their reasonable concerns.

The government arrogantly presume this group of citizens would not worry about having their privacy invaded.

They can also check your outgoings match your income and that you are paying enough tax. What do you think all this privacy invasion is for? The War on Terrorism? You poor dupe.

All your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent.

The authorities try make everything they say sound perfectly reasonable.

e.g. Officials from US Defence Department agency have said that they want, the same level of accountability in cyberspace that we now have in the physical world.

Do government currently keep records of everything that you touch in the physical world to analyse?

No they do not. So then, is that the same level of accountability?

They wish to keep an electronic tag on you, like some kind of animal. Actually it is even worse than this - like some pervert sex offender - a child molester that they have to keep track of. Would any person of intelligence call that accountability?

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.

Here in UK, the RIP Act is unjust - dim-witted ill-informed MPs believed governments 'experts'. Remember - they will get everything about you, your phone calls, emails, TV viewing - everything. It would be like having a spy living in your house.

Americans - the Total Information Awareness plan, USA Patriot act and Homeland Defence - you are more technologically aware, are you really that easily misled?

Garry Anderson

P.S. Did you know the the United States Department of Commerce and United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization LIED, when they said there was no solution to trademark conflict with domain names?

They are dishonourable cowards. The UN Organization, who deal with these conflicts, use WIPO.org - I use VERY similar URL - please visit.

Domain names are NOT just for trademarks and countries - ask DNS creator Paul Mockapetris - normal people can use them also.

The authorities hide solution to these problems, to enable the domains to be easily taken from owner.

The domain name can be used to communicate title, or tell of subject, or give author.

The domain name as title may be picked because it sounds good or is easy to remember.

The domain name as subject would tell readers what they will find within.

The authorities would have you believe that it is always the author.

Countries and places give same false argument.

If you wrote a book entitled 'South Africa', do the rights to this book belong to that countries government?

The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization deal with these conflicts.

UN WIPO would not confirm or deny the simple solution when it was pointed out to them.

You might ask, "Why not - surely they want it?"

Trademark and Competition Law is being violated by big business - so money and power perhaps.

Guess who pays UN WIPO?

There is no doubt in my mind - the United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and United States Department of Commerce are corrupt.

Please visit World Intellectual Piracy Organization- no connection with corrupt United Nations WIPO.org !

Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught!

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".

This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).

This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.

So what was their crime, to deserve this investigation? It was just for showing up members of government to be the incompetents they were.

As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to use this information as propaganda - to smear the character of these good people.

Our honourable government would rather defile the character of its citizens - rather than address their reasonable concerns.

The government arrogantly presume this group of citizens would not worry about having their privacy invaded.

They can also check your outgoings match your income and that you are paying enough tax. What do you think all this privacy invasion is for? The War on Terrorism? You poor dupe. All your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent.

The authorities try make everything they say sound perfectly reasonable.

e.g. Officials from US Defence Department agency have said that they want, "the same level of accountability in cyberspace that we now have in the physical world".

Do government currently keep records of everything that you touch in the physical world to analyse?

No they do not - So then, is that the same level of accountability?

They wish to keep an electronic tag on you, like some kind of animal. Actually it is even worse than this - like some pervert sex offender - a child molester that they have to keep track of. Would any person of intelligence call that accountability?

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.

In UK, the RIP Act is unjust - dim-witted ill-informed MPs believed governments 'experts'. Remember - they will get everything about you, your phone calls, emails, TV viewing - everything. It would be like having a spy living in your house.

Americans - the Total Information Awareness plan, USA Patriot act and Homeland Defence - you are more technologically aware, are you really that easily misled?

I cannot stress enough - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them. I know from experience, as fact, they have no morals and will purposefully twist this information to use against you. I have documentary evidence of this - actual government agency case notes. Should government take legal action to deny that they pervert how personal information is used, then these documents may be viewed in a court of Law.

P.S. The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department of Commerce are hiding the simple solution to trademark and domain name problem. The solution was ratified by honest attorneys. Please visit my site - not associated with United Nations WIPO.org. The United Nations WIPO deal with these conflicts - but are without honour and too cowardly to directly answer my easy questions (as are the US DoC).

Quote from DARPA: "The goal of the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program is to revolutionize the ability of the United States to detect, classify and identify foreign terrorists - and decipher their plans - and thereby enable the U.S. to take timely action to successfully preempt and defeat terrorist acts."

What a load of bull*. Why has NOBODY asked the Security Services the following? I have posted this argument several times before.

Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".

This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).

This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.

So what was their crime, to deserve this investigation? It was just for showing up members of government to be the incompetents they were.

As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to use this information as propaganda - to smear the character of these good people.

Our honourable government would rather defile the character of its citizens, rather than address their reasonable concerns.

The government arrogantly presume this group of citizens would not worry about having their privacy invaded.

They can also check your outgoings match your income and that you are paying enough tax. What do you think all this privacy invasion is for? The War on Terrorism? You poor dupe. All your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent.

The authorities try make everything they say sound perfectly reasonable.

e.g. Officials from US Defence Department agency have said that they want, "the same level of accountability in cyberspace that we now have in the physical world".

Do government currently keep records of everything that you touch in the physical world to analyse?

No they do not - So then, is that the same level of accountability?

They wish to keep an electronic tag on you, like some kind of animal. Actually it is even worse than this - like some pervert sex offender that they have to keep track of. Would any person of intelligence call that accountability?

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.

In UK, the RIP Act is unjust - dim-witted ill-informed MPs believed governments 'experts'. Remember - they will get everything about you, your phone calls, emails, TV viewing - everything.

Americans - the Total Information Awareness plan, USA Patriot act and Homeland Defence - you are more technologically aware, are you really that easily led?

I cannot stress enough - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them. I know from experience, as fact, they have no morals and will purposefully twist this information to use against you. I have documentary evidence of this - actual government agency case notes. Should government take legal action to deny that they pervert how personal information is used, then these documents may be viewed in a court of Law.

P.S. The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department of Commerce are hiding the simple solution to trademark and domain name problem. The solution was ratified by honest attorneys. Please visit my site - not associated with United Nations WIPO.org. The United Nations WIPO deal with these conflicts - but are without honour and too cowardly to directly answer my easy questions (as are the US DoC).

Why has NOBODY asked the Security Services the following? I have posted this argument several times before.

Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".

This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).

This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.

So what was their crime, to deserve this investigation? It was just for showing up members of government to be the incompetents they were.

As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to use this information as propaganda - to smear the character of these good people.

Our honourable government would rather defile the character of its citizens, rather than address their reasonable concerns.

The government arrogantly presume this group of citizens would not worry about having their privacy invaded.

They can also check your outgoings match your income and that you are paying enough tax. What do you think all this privacy invasion is for? The War on Terrorism? You poor dupe. All your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent.

The authorities try make everything they say sound perfectly reasonable.

e.g. Officials from US Defence Department agency have said that they want, "the same level of accountability in cyberspace that we now have in the physical world".

Do government currently keep records of everything that you touch in the physical world to analyse?

No they do not - So then, is that the same level of accountability?

They wish to keep an electronic tag on you, like some kind of animal. Actually it is even worse than this - like some pervert sex offender that they have to keep track of. Would any person of intelligence call that accountability?

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.

In UK, the RIP Act is unjust - dim-witted ill-informed MPs believed governments 'experts'. Remember - they will get everything about you, your phone calls, emails, TV viewing - everything.

Americans - the Total Information Awareness plan, USA Patriot act and Homeland Defence - you are more technologically aware, are you really that easily led?

I cannot stress enough - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them. I know from experience, as fact, they have no morals and will purposefully twist this information to use against you. I have documentary evidence of this - actual government agency case notes. Should government take legal action to deny that they pervert how personal information is used, then these documents may be viewed in a court of Law.

P.S. The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department of Commerce are hiding the simple solution to trademark and domain name problem. The solution was ratified by honest attorneys. Please visit my site - not associated with United Nations WIPO.org. The United Nations WIPO deal with these conflicts - but are without honour and too cowardly to directly answer my easy questions (as are the US DoC).

Quote: "Worse, Auerbach said in a telephone interview with O'Reilly Network, ICANN uses its domain name dispute resolution process to expand the rights of trademark holders, routinely taking away domains from people with legitimate rights to them, only to reward them to multinational corporations with similar names."

The registered trademark symbol ® (called 'R' in a circle or RTM) identies them in physical world - isn't it obvious something is required in cyberspace to perform same function?

Facts:

The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department of Commerce are hiding the simple solution to trademark and domain name problem. But they would rather be aiding and abetting corporations to violate Trademark and Competition Law.

Virtually every word is trademarked - most are many times over (in different types of business and/or country) so every domain can be 'stolen' in UDRP from the legal owner, on the premise that it is confusingly similar.

Corporations have no desire at all to prevent confusion on the Internet - they just wish illegal dominance of it.

You can legally use any word, words or initials to start a new business without registering a trademark - providing you are not passing off, of course. Take for example the word 'apple'. It is legally used by thousands of businesses - large and small all over the world. Indeed, it is impossible that they all register themselves as trademarks - they are bound to conflict with many others, being confusingly similar. In my local phone book alone, there are at least five using this word - two garages (seems not connected), a car centre, fruit growers and a decorating firm. These are unlawfully being prevented from getting their name in Sunrise period.

In this vast ocean of domains on the Internet, mostly non-trademarks, a marker is absolutely essential - for people to identify it as trademark - e.g. a new protected TLD of .reg !

name.class.country.reg would identify all trademarks - e.g. apple.computer.us.reg and apple.record.uk.reg.

This could be used as certificate of authentication. There is no restriction on business, it can still use current/new domain, just directed to dot REG.

For more facts please visit World Intellectual Piracy Organization - Not associated with United Nations WIPO.org

Even though it is true government look for dirt on citizens, proof below, many shortsighted people are not worried about this invasion of privacy. These people think it does not affect them. They are very naive, to say the least.

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", they may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".

The government want a surveillance society - for doing things like checking your outgoings match your income and that you are paying enough tax. What do you think all this privacy invasion is for? The War on Terrorism? You poor dupe - I shall also disprove that is fallacy below.

This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all.

Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington rail crash survivors group. It was lead by Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after being badly injured in the 1999 crash (which killed 31 and injured many).

This group had fought for better and safer railways - all quite legally. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people with good intent.

As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to smear the character of these good people.

The government arrogantly presume she and the rest of group would not worry about having their privacy invaded.

You want the Truth about Government Surveillance on the Internet?

Then ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face-to-face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from CNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

I explained why you should worry above. As I say, this could be anything - all your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes. You are then a crook.

They try make everything they say all sound perfectly reasonable.

e.g. Officials from US Defence Department agency have said that they want, "the same level of accountability in cyberspace that we now have in the physical world"

Do government currently keep records of everything that you touch in the physical world to analyse?

No they do not - So then, is that the same level of accountability?

They wish to keep an electronic tag on you, like some kind of animal. Actually, it is even worse than this - like some pervert sex offender that they have to keep track of. Would any person of intelligence call that accountability?

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.

In UK, the RIP Act is unjust - dim-witted ill-informed MPs believed governments 'experts'. Remember - they will get everything about you, your phone calls, emails, TV viewing - everything.

Americans (as a backhanded compliment) - with the Total Information Awareness plan, USA Patriot act and Homeland Defence - you are more technologically aware - are you really that easily lead?

I cannot stress enough - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them. I know from experience, as fact, they have no morals and will purposefully twist this information to use against you. I have documentary evidence of this - actual government agency case notes. Should government take legal action to deny that they pervert how personal information is used, and then these documents may be viewed in a court of Law.

P.S. The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO.org) and the United States Department of Commerce (DOC.gov) are hiding the simple solution to trademark and domain name problem. The solution was ratified by honest attorneys. Please visit my WIPO.org.uk site - not associated with United Nations WIPO.org. The United Nations WIPO deal with these conflicts - but are without honour and too cowardly to directly answer my easy questions (as are the US DoC).

I gave this comment before - the logic is undeniable. Nobody has ever gave reasoned argument against it:

Ask Security Services in the US, UK or Indonesia (Bali), or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - Meet you in the pub Monday (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - IT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) that the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from CNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in the UK when government checked for dirt on individuals of the Paddington crash survivors group. This group was lead by the badly injured Pam Warren - whom they arrogantly presume would have nothing to worry about, having her privacy invaded.

All your finances for them to scrutinize - heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.

Do not believe the LIES of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists.

P.S. On the Domain Name System, big business steal words that belong to everybody in UDRP and Sunrise - abridging what words you can use - violating the First Amendment. Don't believe me? Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over. Even common words you learnt with your A B C's - apple, ball and cat. It is major Corporations illegally abusing and expand their brand using domain names - above other trademarks and all smaller businesses who use similar words - violating Trademark and Competition Law.

The authorities LIE - they know how to make these trademark domains unique and totally distinctive, as the LAW requires trademarks to be. They are aiding and abetting the pervertion of Law. Please visit the World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not connected with the corrupt United Nations !

They authorities know the solution.

When Nissan Motors tried to take nissan.com from Mr Nissan, their spokesman said "We registered nissancomputer.com and offered it to him for free, but he has no interest in being Nissan Computer -- his real name"

They have nissanmotors.com - so is it not EXACTLY the same as them having no interest in being Nissan Motors -- their real name.

IANAL but Nissan act unlawfully by overreaching their trademark - they cannot claim all occurances of the word 'nissan'. It is against Competition Law for them to prevent others from doing using the word in business - if they are not acting unlawfully (which Mr Nissan is not).

Quote from European Competition Law:

2. Abuses of dominant position (Article 82)

2.2. What are the prohibited practices under Article 82?
c) Abuse of intellectual property rights The mere existence of a patent, trademark or copyright is not sufficient to establish a dominant position.

Like I say, the authorities know the solution to trademark conflict and consumer confusion on the Internet. It is therefore logical to conclude that the US DoC, ICANN and UN WIPO are dishonest (to say the least), as they hide the answer (ratified by honest attorneys).

Please visit WIPO.org.uk to see it. Not associated with corrupt United Nations !

I have posted similar comment several times before - the logic is undeniable. Nobody has ever gave reasoned argument against it:

Ask Security Services in the US, UK or Indonesia (Bali), or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - Meet you in the pub Monday (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - bull*.

SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - IT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) that the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from CNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in the UK when government checked for dirt on individuals of the Paddington crash survivors group. This group was lead by the badly injured Pam Warren - whom they arrogantly presume would have nothing to worry about, having her privacy invaded.

All your finances for them to scrutinize - heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.

Do not believe the LIES of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists.

P.S. On the Domain Name System, big business steal words that belong to everybody - abridging what words you can use - violating the First Amendment. Don't believe me? Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over. Even common words you learnt with your A B C's - apple, ball and cat. It is major Corporations illegally abusing and expand their brand using domain names - above other trademarks and all smaller businesses who use similar words - violating Trademark and Competition Law.

The authorities LIE - they know how to make these trademark domains unique and totally distinctive, as the LAW requires trademarks to be. They are aiding and abetting the pervertion of Law. Please visit the World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not connected with the corrupt United Nations WIPO.org !

Quote: Claims of invasions of privacy online are "baseless," says Mark Corallo, a spokesperson for the Justice Department.

What a load of spin (lies). I have posted similar comment a few times before - the logic is undeniable. Nobody has ever gave reasoned argument against it:

Ask Security Services in the US, UK or Indonesia (Bali) to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - Meet you in the pub Monday (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - bull*.

SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - IT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) that the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from CNET [zdnet.com]: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in the UK when government checked for dirt on individuals of the Paddington crash survivors group. This group was lead by the badly injured Pam Warren - whom they presume would have nothing to worry about, having her privacy invaded.

All your finances for them to scrutinize - heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.

Do not believe the LIES of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists.

P.S. On the Domain Name System, big business steal words that belong to everybody - abridging what words you can use - violating the First Amendment. Don't believe me? Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over. Even common words you learnt with your A B C's - apple, ball and cat. It is major Corporations illegally abusing and expand their brand using domain names - above other trademarks and all smaller businesses who use similar words - violating Trademark and Competition Law.

The authorities LIE - they know how to make these trademark domains unique and totally distinctive, as the LAW requires trademarks to be. They are aiding and abetting the pervertion of Law. Please visit the World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not connected with the corrupt United Nations WIPO.org !

I have posted similar comment a couple of times before - the logic is undeniable. Nobody has ever gave reasoned argument against it:

Ask Security Services in the US, UK or Indonesia (Bali) to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - Meet you in the pub Monday (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - bull*.

SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - IT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) that the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from CNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

All your finances for them to scrutinize - heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.

Do not believe the LIES of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists.

P.S. On the Domain Name System, big business steal words that belong to everybody - abridging what words you can use - violating the First Amendment. Corporations illegally abuse and expand their brand using domain names - above all smaller businesses who use similar words - violating Competition Law.

The authorities LIE - they know how to make these trademark domains unique and totally distinctive, as the LAW requires trademarks to be. They are aiding and abetting the pervertion of Law. Please visit the World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not connected with United Nations WIPO.org !

Quote: A federal appeals panel has ruled that the operator of Bargainbeanies.com is not violating the trademark of Beanie Babies creator Ty by offering used dolls through the Web address. The case is significant because it supports the ability of second-hand resellers to market and hawk their wares over the Internet without running afoul of trademark laws.

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-961090.html?tag=cd_m h

Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over. MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with five trademarks - in the U.S. alone (please check). This could be any acronym or initialism - including the famous International Trade Centre (ITC) or International Monetary Fund (IMF).

You can legally use any word, words or initials to start a new business without registering a trademark - providing you are not passing off, of course. Take for example the word 'apple'. It is legally used by thousands of businesses - large and small all over the world. Indeed, it is impossible that they all register themselves as trademarks - they are bound to conflict with many others, being confusingly similar. In my local phone book alone, there are at least five using this word - two garages (seems not connected), a car centre, fruit growers and a decorating firm.

The authorities hide the simple solution to this conflict. From correspondence with them and their response, I believe them corrupt. Why? For a start, trademark holders do not own the vast majority of domains - it is obvious that something is needed to replace the registered trademark symbol - a new TLD of .reg would do that. This is for the same reasons, primarily to advise people that the mark is legally registered and protected by law. It is indisputable fact that the answer to domain and trademark problems was self-evident and is easier to use than the telephone. Honest lawyers have ratified the solution.

To see major findings please visit WIPO.org.uk - not associated with UN WIPO.org. Although I use the initials WIPO, it is obvious to even the 'crooks' in UN WIPO that this site not associated with them. Same as is obvious to those at AOL that pengaol.org is not associated with them.

I have posted this premise before - the logic is undeniable. Nobody has ever gave reasoned argument against it:

Ask Security Services in the US or UK to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - Meet you in the pub Monday (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - bull*.

SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - IT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) that the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy.This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

All your finances for them to scrutinize - heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more money spent on these measures will not protect you from terrorists.

P.S. On the Domain Name System, big business steal words that belong to everybody - abridging what words you can use - violating the First Amendment. Corporations illegally abuse and expand their brand using domain names - above all smaller businesses who use similar words - violating Competition Law.

The authorities LIE - they know how to make these trademark domains unique and totally distinctive, as the LAW requires trademarks to be. They are aiding and abetting the pervertion of Law. Please visit the World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not connected with United Nations WIPO.org !

While Lisa Bowmans article seems unbiased, I feel it could have given greater analysis for the sake of a few extra lines.

Usually greater analysis in the media equates to corporate spin.

> In this phase of the legal saga, which has gone on for more than six years, the appellate judges are trying to decide VeriSign's culpability in the case.

VeriSign knew it possible to spoof transfers and DID NOT verify the transfer with original owner - so why aren't they guilty of gross negligence?

Objectively, who can say they are not to blame?

Should it not have been pointed out, for those new to this story, that the case was overwhelming against VeriSign?

> However, the court also ruled Kremen cannot sue VeriSign for the transfer because a domain name isn't tangible property. Now Kremen's hoping the appellate panel will overturn that ruling.

Is intangible property worth nothing when owned by individuals - but worth a fortune when owned by corporations?

Obviously, double standards are wrong.

VeriSign had a duty of care for this property.

> Judge Alex Kozinski wondered how VeriSign's DNS database of domain names was any different from a stock certificate, which he said connects an owner with some property.

> David Dolkas, a lawyer for Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich who's representing VeriSign, said that if the judges were asking "is the DNS database somehow representative of an ownership right, the answer is no".

> "Why not?" Kozinski replied. "Why isn't that exactly what it is?"

Nobody can deny that the DNS is representative of an ownership right (as well as pointer to web address).

The article should have highlighted that David Dolkas spun a LIE in court.

> Judge Margaret McKeown also grilled Dolkas, asking him if the company is claiming that it has no responsibility at all in the case.

> Dolka reiterated claims that VeriSign shouldn't be held liable, saying the database is simply a neutral translator between Web addresses and domain names.

The database is a neutral translator between domain and web address - but that is not germane to this central question.

It is spin - evasion - deflection.

Article certainly should have highlighted this.

VeriSign are responsible for the security and accuracy of their database.

They also have a duty to their clients - which they are evading.

Ask anybody in I.T. - the essential requirement of any system like this is for ACCURATE SECURE DATA.

> He said a ruling against his company would "create a world of hurt", opening the floodgates for all types of suits, including contract and property claims from people whose domains are down for just a short while.

It is evasion again - article should have pointed out that this is not at all what the case is about.

The case will make registrars more careful about verifying transfers of domain with the original owner.

> Wagstaffe said the whole case could have been avoided if VeriSign had simply phoned or emailed Kremen and asked him if he approved the transfer. "They do it now. They should have done it then," he said.

Exactly - what else need be said?

> At one point, the judges chastised Cohen's lawyer for his characterisation of the federal judge who ruled against his client. Mike Mayock said the judge was "sucker punched" and "blindsided" by Kremen, an assertion that didn't go over well with the judges.

> "You're really standing there telling us he's a fool?" wondered an incredulous Kozinski. "I don't think it's appropriate for you to call a district judge a sucker."

Shame - Judge Alex Kozinski showed good insight earlier.

Cohen's lawyer was telling the truth, the judge was "sucker punched" - he never said the judge was a moron.

Clever people can fool us ALL.

It is an unwise person who thinks they or others cannot be fooled.

Who here is so arrogant - they think themselves so intelligent, they cannot be fooled?

Additionally: It is my informed opinion the facts are clear - should VeriSign 'get away with it', then either the court is an ass - they ARE morons OR the court is lead by corporations - they ARE corrupt.

P.S. On the Domain Name System, Corporations steal words that belong to everybody - abridging what words you can use - violating the First Amendment.

The Corporations illegally abuse and expand their brand using domain names - above all smaller businesses who use similar words - violating Competition Law.

The authorities LIE - they know how to make trademark domains unique and totally distinctive, as the LAW requires trademarks to be. Please visit the World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not connected with United Nations WIPO.org !

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - bull*.

Ask the Security Services in the UK and US to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means e.g. face to face, personal courier or steganography.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will get caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

SURVEILANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - IT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: making you feel safer - that the government are doing something and the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy.

This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

All your finances for them to scrutinize - heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more money spent on these measures will not protect you from terrorists.

P.S. On the Domain Name System, Corporations steal words that belong to everybody - abridging what words you can use - violating the First Amendment.

The Corporations illegally abuse and expand their brand using domain names - above all smaller businesses who use similar words - violating Competition Law.

The authorities LIE - they know how to make trademark domains unique and totally distinctive, as the LAW requires trademarks to be. Please visit the World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not connected with United Nations WIPO.org !

TO ICANN LAWYERS - JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE

Why do ICANN stick with Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue? Is it because of certain old ICANN links with them? Are JDRP profiteering? They are very costly - have ICANN looked for other Law firms?

Have you checked out JDRP.com - and their people involvement with ICANN?

A quote from a Karl Auerbach:

Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue is ICANN's law firm, and has been so since the day of ICANN's birth. Indeed Jones-Day actually performed the incorporation ceremony in its Los Angeles offices.

Jones, Day, in the person of its principle man-on-the-ICANN-scene, Joe Sims, was present for at least half a year before ICANN was born, working in the shadows, responding to unknown interests and possibly making unknown deals. About all we know about that period is that those who were not insiders to Joe Sims process were ignored and that those who objected were treated with condescension and abuse.

Over the life of ICANN, Jones, Day has been the the dominant creditor of ICANN.

Even now Jones, Day continues to receive a lion's share of every dollar that flows into ICANN.

And one of Jones, Day's partners, Louis Touton, left the firm to become ICANN's Vice-President, Secretary, and General Counsel.

There is in my mind a question about the appearance of propriety.

Karls platform.

***End quote.

In a good two month period, October and November 2000, they got $465,553.67 from ICANN.

ICANN minutes.

As it one of the largest intellectual property practice groups in a general-practice law firm - with more than 85 intellectual property lawyers, I would imagine Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue make a lot of money on trademarks problems on the Internet.

Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue.

Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu - even common words you learnt with your A B C's - apple, ball and cat - most many times over.

MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with six trademarks - U.S. alone (please check). Conflict is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.

The solution to this problem has been ratified by experts - so that ALL registered trademarks can be identified on the Internet.

Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue know this solution.

They would lose a lot of money, if there was less trademark problems on the Internet - wouldn't they?

Draw your own conclusions - but it is my opinion they do not want the solution to 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and 'passing off' problems on the Internet.

There is in my mind certainly no question about the appearance of corruption - it is beyond doubt.

Please visit WIPO.org.uk to see. No connection with the United Nations WIPO.org.

The authorities know the solution to trademark conflicts.

You can legally use any word, words or initials to start a new business without registering a trademark - providing you are not passing off, of course. Take for example the word 'apple'. It is legally used by thousands of businesses - large and small all over the world. Indeed, it is impossible that they all register themselves as trademarks - they are bound to conflict with many others, being confusingly similar. Just in my local phone book alone, there are at least five using this word - two garages (seems not connected), a car centre, fruit growers and a decorating firm.

Fact: Virtually every word is trademarked. In this vast ocean of domains on the Internet, mostly non-trademarks, a marker is absolutely essential - for people to identify it as trademark (e.g. protected TLD of .reg) - as in apple.reg. This is because all word domains are 'confusingly similar' to trademarks. That is one of the excuses they use to steal domain in UDRP.

This .reg could serve the same purpose as the registered trademark symbol ® - to advise the public that it is legally registered and protected by law.

Yes, it is true - check USPTO link at end of paragraph - Virtually every word is trademarked. MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with five trademarks - in the U.S. alone (please check).

Whatever word you have for your business or personal web site, you will have some big bully try take your domain away from you. This is all a fraud by big business - the authorities are corrupt in helping them overreach Trademark Law.

It is ILLEGAL for one trademark to prevent others from using their trademark - even if using identical word. To allow this without consumer confusion or trademark conflict, it is absolutely essential that the class or subclass is included. Please visit WIPO.org.uk - Not associated with United Nations WIPO.org

It seems clear that Corporations wish to prevent criticism about them on the Internet - and your ability to find things on them using search engines.

The authorities know how to make trademark domains unique and totally distinctive. They hide this for several reasons - including to stop you calling them by name. They are all corrupt folks.

Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over. MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with five trademarks - in the U.S. alone.

The authorities prevent ALL from using their name - without 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and 'passing off'.

Please visit WIPO.org.uk - Not associated with United Nations WIPO.org.

Quote: "Honeyman says existing steganography cannot be completely undetectable and adds that the key used to hide messages in images can be revealed with brute force computing power."

Any weakness of steganographic systems can be overcome.

For example; to beat brute force computing power only requires to have the message as an image of obfuscated text. There are several ways to do this; for one - think red-green colourblind eye test charts. It can also be multi-layered - each with seperate key. This would require manual viewing at every single attempt to crack it. The man hours required are too large to estimate.

P.S. The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department are hiding the simple solution to uniquely identify all registered trademarks on the Internet. The answer to this problem has been ratified by honest Lawyers. I believe UN WIPO and US DoC to be corrupt.

If you have heard of the respected Dr. Milton Mueller, you may be interested in the conclusion of his recent report, Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP. My comments and link to it on ICANN forum. His conclusion matches what I told UN WIPO and Nominet UK over a year ago.

Please visit World Intellectual Piracy Organization - Not associated with visit United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization

IMO - I believe we know most of it:

"ICANN is secretive, slow, inefficient and, worst of all, firmly in the pocket of special interests."

From ICANN Forum: Vint has become crooked and does not answer emails any more.

ICANN wants more money to further increase their corrupt powers and for their Lawyers; JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE.

Karl should be allowed to see the books, with gagging preconditions. ICANN are supposed to be OPEN, for flips sake.

ICANN use spin to say critics are just trying to tear down ICANN.

Personally, I have always said ICANN (or similar) is necessary - as John Gilmore says, "No, we're trying to make ICANN accountable to its public for its actions."

Those responsible should pay with time in jail for any illegal acts. Not fines like corrupt fat cats pay - money that will come from us - the consumer.

We learn some new things, like it cost less than 25 cents per year per name to run domain name registry - are we all being screwed or what?

It should cost should cost the huge NSI less than 1 cent per year to do the work. Screwing everybody harder still - car dealers would love that percentage markup.

Mr Mueller, Mr Gilmore and myself all agree on about trademark abuse of power by the greedy corporations:

Milton Mueller's account of Internet governance, portrays ICANN primarily as a tool for trademark protection.

John Gilmore says "I do agree that ICANN and domain name policy has been perverted from the start by the machinations of trademark interests. Actual trademark law gives zero power to cancel or seize domain names, prevent their issuance, etc. Actual trademark law lets hundreds of people use the same name, both in different jurisdictions, and for different kinds of trades (e.g., computers vs. soap vs. ships). Trademark owners only have power over others when the others misrepresent themselves as the trademark owner."

The authorities IGNORE National and Classification boundaries - this is unlawful - ask any (honest) Lawyer. These authorities know the solution to these trademark/domain problems - it is easier than using the telephone.

My fellow posters - these corrupt people in the US DoC, UN WIPO and ICANN are aiding and abetting this abuse. They prevent all registered trademarks from using their mark - an illegal act.

The Truth will win in the end - and the corrupt will be named and shamed.

Please visit World Intellectual Piracy Organization - Not associated with United Nations WIPO.org !

The US and UN authorities IGNORE National and Classification boundaries to aid and abet corporations in the abuse of their trademark powers. This is an unlawful act. They know the solution to trademark problems on the Internet.

You can legally use any word, words or initials to start a new business without registering a trademark - providing you are not passing off, of course. Take for example the word 'APPLE'.

"Apple" is legally used by thousands of businesses - large and small all over the world. Indeed, it is impossible that they all register themselves as trademarks - they are bound to conflict with many others, being confusingly similar. In my local phone book alone, there are at least five using this word - two garages (seems not connected), a car centre, fruit growers and a decorating firm.

"BUT", I hear you say, followed by many reasons why they cannot co-exist without conflict on the Internet.

These reasons are based on PROPAGANDA, SPIN and LIES.

Fact 1: In this vast ocean of domains on the Internet, mostly non-trademarks, a marker is absolutely essential - for people to identify it as trademark; e.g. a new protected TLD of .reg - as in apple.reg

Just like the registered trademark symbol ® - this could serve the same purpose - to advise the public that it is legally registered and protected by law.

This .reg would be protected like .gov sites, so preventing passing off and any conflict with the majority of non-trademark domains. It acts as certificate of authentication.

Fact 2: Given that each country has its own trademark system and can use the same words as another, the country is absolutely essential - as in apple.us.reg

Fact 3: It is illegal for one to prevent others from using their trademark. To allow this without consumer confusion or trademark conflict, it is absolutely essential that the class or subclass is included (e.g. computer) - as in apple.computer.us.reg

Can you tell the difference between apple.computer.us.reg and apple.record.uk.reg?

Of course you can. Being text based it is easier than using the phone.

Current .com domains and new protected TLDs could be used by trademarks for advertising purposes - then redirected to the .reg site e.g. apple.computer or nissan.car

This is all about corrupt authorities aiding and abetting corporations to abuse the Law.

Please visit WIPO.org.uk - World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not associated with United Nations WIPO.org !

TO ICANN LAWYERS - JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE

Why do ICANN stick with Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue? Is it because of certain old ICANN links with them? Are JDRP profiteering? They are very costly - have ICANN looked for other Law firms?

Have you checked out JDRP.com - and their people involvement with ICANN?

A quote from a Karl Auerbach:

Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue is ICANN's law firm, and has been so since the day of ICANN's birth. Indeed Jones-Day actually performed the incorporation ceremony in its Los Angeles offices.

Jones, Day, in the person of its principle man-on-the-ICANN-scene, Joe Sims, was present for at least half a year before ICANN was born, working in the shadows, responding to unknown interests and possibly making unknown deals. About all we know about that period is that those who were not insiders to Joe Sims process were ignored and that those who objected were treated with condescension and abuse.

Over the life of ICANN, Jones, Day has been the the dominant creditor of ICANN.

Even now Jones, Day continues to receive a lion's share of every dollar that flows into ICANN.

And one of Jones, Day's partners, Louis Touton, left the firm to become ICANN's Vice-President, Secretary, and General Counsel.

There is in my mind a question about the appearance of propriety.

Karls platform.

***End quote.

In a good two month period, October and November 2000, they got $465,553.67 from ICANN.

ICANN minutes.

As it one of the largest intellectual property practice groups in a general-practice law firm - with more than 85 intellectual property lawyers, I would imagine Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue make a lot of money on trademarks problems on the Internet.

Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue.

Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu - even common words you learnt with your A B C's - apple, ball and cat - most many times over.

MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with six trademarks - U.S. alone (please check). Conflict is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.

The solution to this problem has been ratified by experts - so that ALL registered trademarks can be identified on the Internet.

Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue know this solution.

They would lose a lot of money, if there was less trademark problems on the Internet - wouldn't they?

Draw your own conclusions - but it is my opinion they do not want the solution to 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and 'passing off' problems on the Internet.

There is in my mind certainly no question about the appearance of corruption - it is beyond doubt.

Please visit WIPO.org.uk to see. No connection with the United Nations WIPO.org.

First, here are three quotes from Rightoprivacy.com

"The right to be left alone -- the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by civilized men.
To protect that right, every unjustifiable intrusion by the government upon the privacy of the individual, whatever the means employed, must be deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment."

Justice Louis Brandeis in Olmstead v. U.S. (1928).

"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy"

Article 12, United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Unfortunately, most people assume that they have greater rights to privacy than the Law actually provides. Others dismiss erosion of their rights to privacy with the dangerously false pretense that only people with something to hide should be concerned about the loss of privacy.

***********

The rest of this is a basic cut and paste from my previous posts on 'Bringing Echelon In From the Cold'

I believe anybody who says "They can read my email - I have nothing to hide" must be of low intelligence - a moron.

This information can be used retrospectively against you - wait until you get a just cause to fight. The UK government love to put down protesters - as can be seen when they tried to get the dirt on Paddington crash survivors group. This group was lead by the badly injured Pam Warren - whom I presume would have nothing to worry about, having her emails read.

News article: Labour admits second email seeking searches on rail group

Labour has found another email from a government adviser seeking information searches on the Paddington rail campaigners.

The adviser to Stephen Byers, sent a second request for the searches - which have been seen as an attempt to 'dig dirt' on members of the public.

Dan Corry's email to the Labour headquarters at Millbank Tower expressed a wish to find out what was behind the group's criticisms of Stephen Byers.

In it, Mr Corry said: "Any other checking useful. They seem to have an anti-SB agenda and we want to find out what lies behind it."

The department said the second email had been unearthed in a "very thorough" trawl of the email traffic from Mr Byers's special advisers.

A spokesman said it failed to reach the Labour Party owing to "intermittent difficulties" with the system.

The disclosure last week of Mr Corry's original email asking for information about the political affiliations of the Paddington group, prompted bitter accusations that the Government was trying to smear the crash survivors for asking awkward questions.

It led to unreserved apologies from Mr Corry and from new Transport Secretary Alistair Darling.

Story filed: 02:35 Tuesday 11th June 2002

***********

What do you think the USA Patriot Act is about?

It is all about Big Brother.

Ask the Security Services in the UK and US to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means e.g. face to face, personal courier or steganography.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will get caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - Go with plan A (human bomb to target A), or plan B (target B) or abort.

SURVEILANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - IT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA.

It is for several reasons, including: making you feel safer - that the government are doing something and the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy.

This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

All your finances for them to scrutinize - heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more money spent on these measures will not protect you from terrorists.

It really annoys me that our governments would con their people like this.

We pay their wages - we deserve the Truth - not this spin and lies.

Beware corporate theft of your domain name. Please visit the World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not associated with United Nations WIPO.org

I have posted this basic text before - as nobody has been able to refuted it, I will repost.

What do you think the USA Patriot Act is about?

For those of low intelligence - it is all about Big Brother.

Ask the Security Services in the UK and US to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means e.g. face to face, personal courier or steganography.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will get caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - Go with plan A (human bomb to target A), or plan B (target B) or abort.

SURVEILANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - IT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA.

It is for several reasons, including: making you feel safer - that the government are doing something and the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy.

This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

All your finances for them to scrutinize - heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more money spent on these measures will not protect you from terrorists.

Incidentally, the United States Department of Commerce lies - they know the solution to uniquelly identify all registered trademarks on the Internet. Please visit the World Intellectual Piracy Organization to see it.

In this context, here are two definitions for you.

Moron: Somebody who believes that government reading your emails is about catching terrorists.

Terrorists know about Echelon and will use other methods e.g. personal courier - either that or get caught.

Moron: Somebody who says, "They can read my email - I have nothing to hide."

This information can be used retrospectively against you - wait until you get a just cause to fight. The UK government love to put down protesters - as can be seen when they tried to get the dirt on Paddington crash survivors group. This group was lead by the badly injured Pam Warren - whom I presume would have nothing to worry about, having her emails read.

News article: Labour admits second email seeking searches on rail group

Labour has found another email from a government adviser seeking information searches on the Paddington rail campaigners.

The adviser to Stephen Byers, sent a second request for the searches - which have been seen as an attempt to 'dig dirt' on members of the public.

Dan Corry's email to the Labour headquarters at Millbank Tower expressed a wish to find out what was behind the group's criticisms of Stephen Byers.

In it, Mr Corry said: "Any other checking useful. They seem to have an anti-SB agenda and we want to find out what lies behind it."

The department said the second email had been unearthed in a "very thorough" trawl of the email traffic from Mr Byers's special advisers.

A spokesman said it failed to reach the Labour Party owing to "intermittent difficulties" with the system.

The disclosure last week of Mr Corry's original email asking for information about the political affiliations of the Paddington group, prompted bitter accusations that the Government was trying to smear the crash survivors for asking awkward questions.

It led to unreserved apologies from Mr Corry and from new Transport Secretary Alistair Darling.

Story filed: 02:35 Tuesday 11th June 2002

Beware corporate theft of your domain name. Please visit World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not associated with United Nations WIPO.org

I had asked the question before on ICANNs own forum: It seems to me difficulties are due to piss poor management and nothing to do with need for structural reform. For instance, why stick with Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue? Is it because of certain old ICANN links with them? Are JDRP profiteering? They are very costly - have you looked for other Law firms?

Have you checked out JDRP.com - and their people involvement with ICANN?

A quote from a Karl Auerbach:

Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue is ICANN's law firm, and has been so since the day of ICANN's birth. Indeed Jones-Day actually performed the incorporation ceremony in its Los Angeles offices.

Jones, Day, in the person of its principle man-on-the-ICANN-scene, Joe Sims, was present for at least half a year before ICANN was born, working in the shadows, responding to unknown interests and possibly making unknown deals. About all we know about that period is that those who were not insiders to Joe Sims process were ignored and that those who objected were treated with condescension and abuse.

Over the life of ICANN, Jones, Day has been the the dominant creditor of ICANN.

Even now Jones, Day continues to receive a lion's share of every dollar that flows into ICANN.

And one of Jones, Day's partners, Louis Touton, left the firm to become ICANN's Vice-President, Secretary, and General Counsel.

There is in my mind a question about the appearance of propriety.

Karls platform.

***End quote.

In a good two month period, October and November 2000, they got $465,553.67 from ICANN.

ICANN minutes.

As it one of the largest intellectual property practice groups in a general-practice law firm - with more than 85 intellectual property lawyers, I would imagine Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue make a lot of money on trademarks problems on the Internet.

Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue.

Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu - even common words you learnt with your A B C's - apple, ball and cat - most many times over.

MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with six trademarks - U.S. alone (please check). Conflict is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.

The solution to this problem has been ratified by experts - so that ALL registered trademarks can be identified on the Internet.

Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue know this solution.

They would lose a lot of money, if there was less trademark problems on the Internet - wouldn't they?

Draw your own conclusions - but it is my opinion they do not want the solution to 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and 'passing off' problems on the Internet.

There is in my mind certainly no question about the appearance of corruption - it is beyond doubt.

Please visit WIPO.org.uk to see. No connection with the United Nations WIPO.org.

First off - trademarks are a good thing - for consumer and business.

Fact: UDRP is bull* propaganda.

For one thing, it goes against Unfair Competition Law - they give priority to one business above others, who share the same word(s) or initials. For another they abridge the use of words to the people.

I have been in contact, for quite some time, with US and UK authorities (and lawyers) on these domain and trademark problems.

Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over.

MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country.

For example, the World Trade Organization - WTO shares its initials with six trademarks - in the U.S. alone. The same with any initials, International Trade Centre - ITC, International Monetary Fund - IMF etc., etc., etc.

Same for any word apple, ball, cat etc., etc., etc. They all are shared by many other businesses.

The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department of Commerce know the answer to exclusively identify ALL trademark domains.

It would allow ALL to use their trademark, without 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and 'passing off'.

Based on all evidence, I believe the authorities are corrupt. If they truly wanted rid of these problems, why do they not use the solution?

People and small non-trademarked businesses could then use domains without these excuses being used to take away (steal) their legal property in UDRP.

The simple solution was ratified by honest attorneys - including the honourable G. Gervaise Davis III, UN WIPO panellist judge.

Please visit WIPO.org.uk to see - no connection with United Nations WIPO.org.

Fact 1: Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over. MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with six trademarks - in the U.S. alone (please check). Conflict is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.

Fact 2: The authorities steal words that belong to everybody and give them to Big Business - because domain names were not designed to be trademarks. Ask Paul Mockapetris, creator of Domain Name System. He was asked, what do you wish you had invented? His reply, "A directory system for the Internet that wouldn't be controlled by the politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats."

Fact 3: The UN World Intellectual Property Organization and the US Department of Commerce are hiding the simple solution to trademark and domain name problem. Please see at WIPO.org.uk - nothing to do with the United Nations WIPO.org.

Given your expertise Jay, I am greatly suprised that you don't get it.

You say, "Domain names are addresses, people! They're not speech!"

That is a simplistic and slightly misleading statement.

Domains names are for naming resources.

Paul Mockapetris, DNS creator, said, "The goal of domain names is to provide a mechanism for naming resources in such a way that the names are usable in different hosts, networks, protocol families, internets, and administrative organizations."

I use WIPO.org.uk because the United Nations use WIPO.org to take away domains from owners. There was no better domain for me to make protest and publish the solution to trademark problem.

ICANN and Big Business want control over words you can use on the Internet. They say to stop trademark problems - to my mind that is a lie. For one thing, they want to muffle you.

Which of these gets the message across better: WIPO.org.uk OR freespace.virgin.net/garry.anderson/WIPO?

Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over. MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with six trademarks - in the U.S. alone (please check). Conflict is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.

You would think then, they would want solution to stop 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and 'passing off' on the Internet - wouldn't you?

A solution that does not make restrictions upon them or mean giving up their dot com domains?

The answer was self-evident - but they do not want it. This is even though Sunrise and UDRP abridges US citizen rights to even use dictionary words - it also gives priority of one trademark over another - with non-trademark holder standing no chance. This violates First Amendment principles and is against Unfair Competition Law.

Paul Mockapetris, creator of the Domain Name System was asked, what do you wish you had invented?

He replied, "A directory system for the Internet that wouldn't be controlled by the politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats."

The Internet is going to the dogs.

Fact: UDRP is not only imperfect and inconsistent - it a fatally flawed system.

Fact: You are being deceived - the authorities know the answer to trademark problems on the Internet.

The United States Department of Commerce and the United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization are hiding it.

The US Patent and Trademark Office virtually admitted this, "The questions you raised with respect to trademark conflicts, as well as the proposed solutions, have their basis in good common-sense. As such, they have been debated and discussed quite exhaustively within the USPTO, the Administration, and internationally."

Honest attorneys, including the honourable G. Gervaise Davis III (UN WIPO panellist judge), have ratified the solution.

Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over. MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with six trademarks - in the U.S. alone (please check). Conflict is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.

This is most important - as Sunrise and UDRP abridges what words people can use in an open (repeat - OPEN) gTLD. They also give priority of one business over another.

Please keep re-reading last paragraph until you completely understand - they violate the First Amendment and go against Unfair Competition Law.

That is quite apart and separate from the fact that they know the solution.

Which is this:

User enters apple.com - is redirected to apple.computer.us.reg

User enters apple.newTLD - is redirected to apple.record.uk.reg

In the address bar - can you tell the difference between, apple.computer.us.reg and apple.record.uk.reg?

So, no 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and 'passing off' there then.

A new restricted TLD, of .REG, for trademarks would act as certificate of authentication and directory, when entered directly.

Lawyers read feeble excuses link on my site before replying - I have heard them all.

Nobody wants the solution - because by not having it they gain. Primarily - Lawyers get loads of money from the conflicts and Big Business by muffling criticism and ensuring they monopolize their trademark words on the Internet.

My beliefs and findings, above and on my site, have proven corruption beyond all reasonable doubt - nobody can refute the logical conclusions made.

Please visit WIPO.org.uk - nothing to do with United Nations WIPO.org.