Slashdot Mirror
Is It OK To Sucks?
I have a problem with the whole notion of taking domains away to begin with. The only tune that corporate, capitalist American can sing is "the free market" -- except when it comes to the free market in domain names.
Real estate speculation? Great, it optimizes efficiency. Currency market speculation? Balances resources internationally and assures prosperity. But domain name speculation? You filthy cybersquatter!
Personally I could see this being useful in 1995, when companies were just waking up to the internet, but I think it's run its course. Any company in 2001 that hasn't registered its corporate name, and all its major products' names before making them public, is stupid and deserves to pay large sums of money to savvy entrepreneurs. In 2001, we're just seeing natural selection running its course. Bailing out stupidity is corporate welfare.
Anyway, the big picture is that the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), in adjudicating the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Protocol (UDRP), is trying to find a way to apply trademark law to the internet. The rules put in place ensured that there was to be no free market on "LockheedMartin.com" -- the company that owns the trademark on "LOCKHEED MARTIN" gets it, and others are only allowed to have it if they are doing something appropriate with it (not using it in "bad faith," to be precise).
WIPO makes its decisions based on the UDRP, but has a wide latitude in interpreting it. This is one of its problems, of course. The UDRP has a handful of fuzzy two-word clauses like "bad faith" and "legitimate interests"; WIPO's panelists can interpret them almost any way they want. Consistency is a prerequisite of justice, and randomly-administered justice is no justice at all.
But Monday, the two fuzzy words were "confusingly similar," namely, whether LockheedMartinSucks.com is confusingly similar to LockheedMartin.com. The decisions came down, and they may be the most startling display of WIPO's arbitrary arbitration.
As the decision states, Lockheed-Martin "relie[d] primarily on previous ICANN decisions that have found domain names that combine a trademark with the word 'sucks' to be confusingly similar to the trademark."
Lockheed probably thought it was on safe ground by doing so. The list of domains taken away for that reason was long: guinness-sucks.com, guinness-really-sucks.com, etc., wal-martsucks.com, cabelassucks.com, directlinesucks.com, dixonssucks.com, freeservesucks.com, natwestsucks.com, standardcharteredsucks.com, and wal-martcanadasucks.com, etc.
But Monday's decision, for once, told the truth:
"The disputed domain names are neither identical nor confusingly similar to Complainant's trademarks, since no one would reasonably believe that Complainant operates a website that appends the word 'sucks' to its name and then uses it to criticize corporate America."
What took Captain Obvious so long to arrive?
The decision also notes that in the WalmartCanadaSucks.com decision, the only other case where the trademark-holder was told to take a hike, the sole panelist "expressed skepticism" about the confusing similarity of sucks, "but stopped just short of advocating a per se privilege exempting all 'sucks' domain names."
Likewise here; they make it clear that "no one could reasonably believe" sucks is confusing. And more interestingly -- they do not bother even to consider the other two parts of the three-part test. As soon as they decided that LockheedSucks was not Lockheed, that was it, the case was over.
But, unfortunately, I don't see any language that encourages future panelists to reach the same decision. This is an international body and they don't have to follow the almost-uniquely-American tradition of following precedent and being, you know, predictable. The next ten sucks sites might be taken away, for all anyone can tell. Or they might not. Sucks-sters will just have to hope they get the right panelist.
There were some good lines in this decision, by the way, that tell me that the panelists know what's what. "A website that functions for the exercise of free speech by its nature can not operate with bad faith intent." I like that. Kudos to panelists Foster and Sorkin.
And shame on panelist Wagoner, who was the dissenting voice.
Wagoner was embarrassingly honest in his outrage that the UDRP was being followed, for once. The implication of the majority decision, he complained, is that "the lack of 'confusing similarity' would prevent a finding that the Policy had been violated."
Well, yes: that's exactly how the Policy demands that WIPO rule. When your personal beliefs about what the UDRP should say, Mr. Wagoner, differ from what it actually does say, we'd hope you can figure out which to follow.
And among his reasons why "sucks" should be swallowed up by corporate America is that consumer eyeballs belong to corporate America. If you the consumer do a search for Lockheed, happen to notice that someone is criticizing it at a sucks domain, and then of your own free will and volition decide you want to click and see what the criticism is all about, your reckless websurfing has made you party to a filching of Lockheed's intellectual property:
"...it is likely (given the relative ease by which websites can be entered) that such users will choose to visit the sites, if only to satisfy their curiosity. Respondent will have accomplished his objective of diverting potential customers of Complainant to his websites by the use of domain names that are similar to Complainant's trademark."
The other two panelists smacked down that insipid argument explicitly, too, by the way, saying that once the searcher sees the sucks and nonsucks alternatives, he or she will exhibit a discernment and intelligence measurably higher than the average garden slug.
Someone needs to ask WIPO: what the hell is going on?
Trademark law (in the United States at least) exists for the citizen's protection, not the corporation's. The laws against dilution of trademarks exist so that you and I will not be confused. When the law, or in this case the arbitration rules, start to protect corporations' trademark interests over ours, something has gone wrong.
And domain names are the real estate of the internet. Obviously a sucks domain name is parody, and will not be confused with its target -- obviously. People who would criticize corporations have enough problems to worry about already with libel suits they can't afford to defend (win or lose). The last thing they need is a governing body that can take away their website on absurd charges of trademark violation.
And the second-to-last thing they need is a governing body that can't make up its damn mind.
"Outraged! Outraged! Our glorious revolution nearly failed this harvest season when a C-130 Hercules transport cracked an engine mount. This shit-eating miserable plane had THREE STOPS for unscheduled repairs last month alone. THREE! Meanwhile the insurgent peasants are rearming and power is slipping through my fingers like rice bobbing down a spring stream.
So of course I try to return the plane but the ignorant swine at Lockheed-Martin will not accept it without a receipt! A RECEIPT! They say I could have bought it from some OTHER aircraft and aerospace manufacturing concern! Absurd! They will not even give me in-store credit!
If the ignorant revolutionaries gain control of our southwest border because my LOCKHEED CRAP could not deliver supplies, may the stinking, rotting carcasses from this company swell and burst, soiling the earth of their foul campus with their necrotic entrails for seven generations to come!"
I work as a computer consultant in the real estate industry. A client of mine (a mortgage broker) with a company name of Bayshore Mortgage jumped on the dot-com bandwagon and registered ebayshore.com. eBay accused him of "diluting their trademark". They were going to take him to WIPO, but since they probably knew that they didn't have much of a chance since he passed two of the three criteria (and the "confusingly similar" was a stretch at best) they instead filed a trademark infringement lawsuit in a federal court. My client was just a one-man operation and was forced to surrender the domain because he couldn't afford to pay a lawyer to get into a long drawn-out battle with eBay. Ain't justice grand?
YUO = FAGOT
I registered microsoft.usuck.com many months ago, it redirects to slashdot :)
And before you ask, yes, this is real
-----Original Message-----
> WIPO LAUNCHES ESSAY COMPETION
> The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has launched an
> international essay competition as part of a series of events to mark the
> first ever World Intellectual Property Day on April 26, the date on which
> the Convention establishing WIPO entered into force in 1970. WIPO member
> states decided at their annual meetings in September 2000 to designate this
> date for special activities to highlight the importance and practical use of
> intellectual property in people's lives.
>
> The competition, conducted by WIPO's Worldwide Academy (WWA), is open to
> university students. The 2000-word essay must address the question "What
> does intellectual property mean to you in your daily life" and must be
> submitted in English. The two best essays will each be awarded a scholarship
> for the 2001 session of the WWA Summer School in Geneva for a period of six
> weeks, including accommodation and return flights.
>
> Entries must be sent to the WWA by March 15, 2001. The winners will be
> announced on April 26, 2001. For further information, please consult
> www.wipo.int. Questions can be addressed to dl101.academy@wipo.int.
>
> Essays and university details must be sent to:
>
> Mrs. Francesca Toso Dunant
> World Intellectual Property Day International Essay Competition
> WIPO Worldwide Academy (WWA)
> PO Box 18, CH-1211, Geneva
> Switzerland
"The Panel does not infer that "-sucks" domain names are immune from scrutiny as being confusingly similar to trademarks to which they are appended. Each case must be considered in light of the facts presented."
And which facts are relevant? How am I to know whether I'm breaking the law or not?
That is a different case, the phrase "primus sucks" has been used by fans and encouraged by the band for many years. I doubt that the band would sue itself for having the primussucks.com domain.
;P
Now, the band might not like it if the people who own primus.com decided to tell everyone how good the band is....
If only "common" sense was actually that common...
Absurd cases are routinely tossed out by courts. This one should have been among those.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
The Guinness case should have been tossed out without ever bothering the domain owner. The case was ridiculous. If guinness wanted the domain they should have bought it. If not, then they should have just left it alone.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
If anything, we need a way to challenge WIPO rulings; as such, they are considered final and thus one cannot appeal them. Or even better, reinstate the initial policy: first come, first served, whiners can show their own way to the door.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
But this case is based entirely in the US. The US govt. can't delegate authority to violate the first amendment to international bodies or treaty organizations that it's a party to, because it never had that authority anyway.
Treaties are great - but they shouldn't really have any effect until there's a federal law passed to comply with the treaty (otherwise you have impermissable situations like the President and a majority of the Senate taxing people through treaties w/o any involvement by the House) and that law has to be constitutional or it'll get overturned.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Ok. Lockheed and the lockheedsucks guy are both in the US, making it a domestic matter.
;) wishes to, or was foolish enough to give WIPO the power to compel them, that's fine too.
Obviously if anyone for any reason wishes to change their name servers, they can anyway. If some heathen country (why yes, I'm an American
But just because WIPO says jump, doesn't mean that the US has to ask how high.
Imagine if they had requested that he be thrown in jail without a trial, tortured, and his property siezed without due compensation. The US hasn't got the power to do any of that, and aren't allowed to follow the orders of anyone who tells them to do it anyway. It's no different in this case.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
so if algoresucks.com is bad then how about my domain algoreisapigfucker.com? ya think i'll get in trouble?
*smirk*
IRNI
www.WIPOsux0rs.com
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
--
It's good that they're helping educate people about technology...
Just don't try to register the $5000 server as "lockheedmartindoesntsuck.net", or you may find yourself in trouble....
---
"They have strategic air commands, nuclear submarines, and John Wayne. We have this"
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
And how about the Supreme Court? You didn't vote for any of them. Nor the Secretary of State. Nor the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Nor the Attorney General. Not any federal judge. Not the head of the FDA. None of those are elected positions.
It's exactly the same deal. You may not have directly elected the rulers of WIPO but you DID vote for the people who voted to join WIPO and agreed to its rules and regulations. And if you don't like it you can vote other people in to have us leave.
Ok, so maybe I'm a cynical bastard, but this couldn't *possibly* have anything to do with the upcoming anal probe that the US Congress is planning for ICANN, would it?
Nah... Silly me.
- Sig me baby, eight to the bar!...
"...they may harpoon us, but they ain't gonna pick us up on no radar screen!"
you also probably meant to write '#undef', too. :P
</pedantic>
"If ignorance is bliss, may I never be happy.
-- Veni, vidi, dormivi
As others have pointed out, it's already registered, but "wiporeallysucks.com" isn't. Nor is "wipo-really-sucks.com", "guinessreallysucks.com", or "guiness-really-sucks.com." It's probably a safe bet that Wal-Mart, Lockheed-Martin, etc. haven't registered all the permutations of mixing their name and the word "sucks" in with various adjectives and/or body parts/other disgusting items. Hell, you can probably get "wiposucksthegoatsexman.com."
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
I always thought that large disclaimers would do the trick.
If I ran a site (Xsucks.com) and put a large disclaimer at the top, saying something on the lines of "This site is not affiliated with X, please visit X.com if you wish to see the real site", then any argument that the site would be confused with the real thing would surely fall over, as long as your disclaimer wouldn't be missed (after all, "read this before installing" type agreements have been enforced before, so a "read this before viewing the webpage" would certainly hold water).
Likewise, I've always thought that companies with like names, but totally different businesses, should offer links to each other's sites. If you remember Prince vs Prince, where a British computer consultancy was sued by the American sportswear manufacturer for Prince.com (and you can see who won by visiting). The current prince.com would not lose any business by pointing visitors to the site they might really be wanting.
I think I'm just saying, "be nice".
wipo.reallyfuckingsucks.net
Ooops.
That should read
wipo.really.fuckingsucks.net
There used to be more, but Laurence Godfrey got pissed at my site and threatened to sue, call the FBI, etc.
Well the FBI called, and I was forced by them to take down half of the content.
Append the url with old_index.php3 and you can see the origial content. I submitted the story to Slashdot under YRO but it was rejected as usual. I have a very funny log of emails from Prof. G.
[root@ranger /proc]# whois wiposucks.com [whois.crsnic.net]
.com, .net, and .org domains can now be registered
.COM, .NET, .ORG, .EDU domains and
Whois Server Version 1.3
Domain names in the
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.
Domain Name: WIPOSUCKS.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: www.networksolutions.com
Name Server: GATE.TELLURIAN.NET
Name Server: NS1.INFOLOOK.COM
Updated Date: 05-aug-1999
>>> Last update of whois database: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 11:19:21 EST
The Registry database contains ONLY
Registrars.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Its an alternative. ... do use blows vs sucks. Or maybe bites....
---
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
In my opinion, the biggest contrast that I see between this decision and the decision regarding guinness-sucks.com is that in this case, the person holding the potentially infringing domain name actually responded to the WIPO panel and the Complainants contentions. Unfortunately, I don't see much chance of winning a dispute if one doesn't respond to it.
The reason why no one cares is that no one has to use Hotmail, or any other webmail shite. You can easily register your own domains and give yourself any email addr you want.
DNS, though, is a different beast alltogether. While it is possible to set up your own root DNS servers, it's kind of pointless since no one will use them. Thus, we are stuck using the current DNS system, which means that domain dispute resolution policies affect us all.
How about adding .sucks to the top level domains. Surely that'd clear up any confusion. Wouldn't it?
Small correction: That was *not* Nelson Mandela. Mandela has a very solid head on his sholders. Rather, it was current South African president Thabo Mbeki. He did indeed get the idea that HIV does not cause AIDS from the web and unscrupulous doctors therein.
- Rev.
Ok, now should slashdot go after www.slashdotsucks.net, or www.slashdotsucks.com?
Think about it.
How did this troll get published, anyway?
Best Slashdot Co
I take your point about people not challenging complaints, but surely you don't think that a www.guinnesssucks.com is cybersquatting if it complains about guinness? I'd've thought that was a legitimate use for that name.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
I don't think Guinness does support the IRA. However, I don't think it would be a point in their favour if they did. The IRA isn't about republicanism any more, it's just about terrorism and gang warfare. If you wish to support the Irish republican cause, may I suggest donating to the SDLP instead, as they won't ever blow innocent civilians up. As far as the Northern Ireland question, I don't think the British government could care less, it would happily hand NI to the Republic of Ireland if it would solve the problem (which it wouldn't - a majority of NI residents are unionist).
[This may be slightly OT: moderate me down then. I'm on 100 Karma, but dropping below that will be no big deal. The real big deal will be when I drop below 0x40]
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
sigh. Another person who thinks the troubles would be solved by a united Ireland. There are very few English people living in Northern Ireland; however, 60% of the NI population are unionists and want NI to remain part of Britain. So if the Republic of Ireland owned Northern Ireland, the problem would still be just as bad.
Hopefully one day people will be past caring and the two communities can integrate. Tiocfaidh an là, to steal a phrase.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
Is "Póg mo th-On" a standard phrase, or a translation of the French?
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
Not quite. Anyone running a DNS in any country can make www.lockheedmartinsucks.com point to whatever IP address they like. The US Govt only has the power to regulate this if foreigners choose to point their DNS servers at a root server in the US.
Hence WIPO can disagree with the US government. If it wants to, WIPO can say that a.root-servers.net violates international treaties. If it wants to, WIPO can rule that member countries should block traffic to a.root-servers.net. So a significant number of people would be able to see 216.182.45.14 at "www.lockheedmartinsucks.com", no matter what the US government wanted.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
The comment about being a French speaker in your bio is extremely funny.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
A Guinness buyer is usually an impluse buyer, who buys this overpriced luxury beer to be perceived as a snob, an Irish fanatic or to piss off his friends.
That is probably why you bought it that one time in your life, but some people actually buy it because they enjoy it.
Really, there are many other, better, cheaper stouts out there, if you don't want to make your own.
There are many different stouts out there, and if you really knew anything about beer, you'd know (good) beers are pretty unique, and there's more that just 'stouts' and 'Bud'. Murphys is good also, but is not a "cheaper stout", it's a different beer.
"...it is likely (given the relative ease by which websites can be entered) that such users will choose to visit the sites, if only to satisfy their curiosity. Respondent will have accomplished his objective of diverting potential customers of Complainant to his websites by the use of domain names that are similar to Complainant's trademark."
I can accomplish the same thing by registering www.pinkelephants.com and sprinkling the HTML with the phrase "Lockheed Martin Sucks!". Search engines do not search only URL's. THey'd be pretty damn useless if that were the case.
Mmmm... unelected, unaccountable UN bureaucracies are exactly what I want running my life. Not. Why are we part of the UN again?
- - - - -
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Like I said, why are we a part of it again? :)
- - - - -
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
First, it generally takes adding the word "sucks" before the dot com to get to the offending web page in question, so the odds of accidentally coming across it are slim.
Second, your over-generalization is disgusting. May as well say that "only the mentally retarded use Windows". - forgetting about and offending the millions of people that use the OS of Doom to play video games [does Linux have Halflife or Baldur's Gate?], office work and so forth. People who drink Guiness, unlike people who use M$ products, are usually doing so for a reason. These are mine:
Yeungling sucks ass in any flavor. It fills the gap between real beer and the beer you see on TV. Guiness is opaque and thick. It's like bread, only better. The taste is decent, and the availability over a comparable beer [Murphy's] is much greater in Pittsburgh- and Guiness is *cheaper* here. It's one of the few beers I can actually finish without feeling sick- I drink it because I like it, not because I'm an Irish fanatic [I'm not- I'm of German decent], or to piss of my friends [when I want to do that, I drink Zima], and the fact that it could be supporting the IRA is a point in its favor.
In any case, what about Primus' website? www.primussucks.com ? It's the official band site, which makes it pretty flack-proof, and a good case in favor of how stupid legal maneuvers like this really are.
Unfortunately, microsoftsucks.com *would* be "confusingly similar"...
A dingo ate my sig...
"How many DNS (the word 'server' is implicit in the use of DNS here, FYI) are on U.S. soil, and are therefore subject to US judiciary control?"
It is not beyond imagining that some DNS operators might choose a different set of servers as "root". There's nothing to prevent this. You should try setting up BIND some time, this might help you understand.
Carefree highway, let me slip away on you.
As has been proven time and time again, baseball free-agency being a good example, no matter how consistent or inconsistent your system is, it is still subject to revocation through the lengthy court process.
Eventually, there probably will be a ban on 'sucks' domains (because of corporate-funded decision-makers) or there will not be (because the free-speech issue is held to be prominent). And if some bodies don't like it, perhaps there will be country-specific '.sucks' registrars...
Carefree highway, let me slip away on you.
What will be interesting is, given a company FOO, if Register.com receives money by selling the domain foosucks.com, are they acting in bad faith? Probably not, given they are an objective, flat-fee service, neither judging nor upcharging particular domain names based on the commercial desirability thereof. But if enough companies threaten and pressure them, and force them into legal expenditures, they just might cave and start filtering against *sucks" and so forth, just to stay unharassed.
--
This is not my sandwich.
the domain holders, a fan club, won their arbitration. http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/internet/02/07/spring steen.net/index.html
where one can look up trademarks (federal/state)?
You can't renamed pets that contain the words "osi" in them.
;-) (PROBABLY not the imagry you want to connotate, but it would of worked)
I was trying to rename something "Rosie" and it wasn't taking it.
>since I couldn't have my "hotmail_sucks_ass" username.
Why didn't you just pick "hotmale_sucks_ass@hotmail.com" ?
ICQ does the same thing. You cannot set your email address associated with your ICQ account to anything that has "icq" in it. It fails silently. I usually give out email addresses that reflect the source in them and it took me a long time to figure out why ICQ was not letting me set my email address.
So, why doesn't somebody create a .sucks.[something] second level domain (e.g sucks.cx or something), and then allow the myriad $(foo)sucks.com wannabes registers $(foo).sucks.cx
sucks.com is unfortunately already registered, but...
www.eFax.com are spammers
Neither of these gov't sanctioned monopolies are entitlements. Read the fucking law. It says it is intended to encourege publication of works, ideas, and services. Not an entitlement. Not something one is born with but a conditional grant given to those who work to build a reputation that they can later trademark, those who invent not only whatever crosses their mind but something further along from what has been invented, and those who produce a document of sorts as it is clear by having produced it that work has occured.
As for your apathy toward abuses, well thanks for nothing...
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
It is not my job or anyone else's to make sure you get your ad revenue or your customers don't stumble upon me in a drunken stupor.
Maybe they stumbled upon the vatican's site while searching for authentic Irish beer mugs. Do yoou sue the vatican? (I would just for good measure, payback for Inquisitional Tendencies and all0
However, if I went and poisoned the DNS cache the way Alternic.com took over InterNIC way back when, that would be grounds for a trademark suit. How far it would get who knows, but there's something clearly amiss there. Granted I agree with the Alternic guy, protest and all.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Companies use trademarks to defend thier interests. Saying trademarks are for the citizens protection is a little like saying patents are consumer protection. Even if the laws are written such that trademark law is as above, that is certainly *not* the case in the real world. Trademarks protect identity, product names and differentiate companies and they are viciously defended to increase revenue. They don't give a hoot about citizen protection as long as the citizens are shopping with them.
-Moondog
I'm wondering... if the guy with the .sucks.com domain started selling names like microsoft.sucks.com and apple.sucks.com, could the WIPO do anything about it?
Just curious.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Of course, Dan would laugh at the humor ...
Chivalry is not dead, it's just frequently misspelt. - M. Langley
The WIPO is not an organization of the government of the United States, and is therefore not bound by the Constitution of the United States. If the WIPO were a U.S. government agency, you'd have a point. The first amendment doesn't really apply here.
The Domain Name System, on the other hand, belongs to the net population at large. It is therefore a public resource. Public resources are administered by public organizations, and they must respect the rights of their users, because it is the users as a body who have an inherent right to control the resources. With webmail, it's the organization who is actually providing the service that has the rights to control the resources.
The difference is subtle, but vast.
--Ford Prefect
OK, so mark me off-topic ...
-Martin
SoftMaker Office for Windows|Linux|Android
My understanding is that basically it's a UN deal and works like the UN. Members are appointed to a panel who votes. I'm assuming the Super-7 or whatever they're called control the majority of what goes on in WIPO.
Mordred
There is decidedly a double standard. Look at "StarBucked.com" for a prime example of how if you have the money and the resources you can do what you want. This ranting loonie decided he had a beef with StarBucks over a crappy espresso machine, and has been on the warpath for years. But he had $$$ and a law degree, so he gets away with it even if he is barking mad (I say this after hearing him on the radio AND talking to him on the phone).
:) because there was a winery with my sirname based out of CA.
If you are just an average Joe/Jane, you have no rights, and WIPO could care less about you. Hell, I couldn't register my name (errr...not Luxury Yacht
Ceci n'est pas une sig.
That's why I registered trulysucks.net. I can run my Warner Brothers sucks site as warnerbrothers.trulysucks.net and there's nothing ICANN or the WIPO can do about it, since the "trademark" bit is in the third-level (and their policies only apply to the second-level domain, not what you put in it).
Anyone who wants to slag off a trademark holder is welcome to a DNS delegation in the domain (just send me an email); it's not a commercial thing at all.
-robin
"A Guinness buyer is usually an impluse buyer, who buys this overpriced luxury beer to be perceived as a snob, an Irish fanatic or to piss off his friends. "
Hang on a mo, this might be true in America, but Guinness isn't aimed at America. It's neither overpriced or a luxury in Britain/Ireland where most of the sales are, it's just an everyday pub drink.
Over here, Mexican Sol and American Budweiser (not the proper Czech stuff) fall into the category of "overpriced luxury beer", but I'm not xenophobic enough to believe that applies eveywhere.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
As taken from the reading... "A majority of this Panel agrees with the result reached by the panelist in the Wallmartcanadasucks.com case, and disagrees with the opposite view in the previously cited cases. Both common sense and a reading of the plain language of the Policy support the view that a domain name combining a trademark with the word "sucks" or other language clearly indicating that the domain name is not affiliated with the trademark owner cannot be considered confusingly similar to the trademark." It is nice to see that they do have some common sense in the matter. It is noted in other posts that if you register a -sucks.com domain, be prepared to defend it in a timely manner, which, in other cases, did not happen and thereby lost their domains. You can't complain about losing it if you don't bother to defend it.
"Reasonable people adapt themselves to the world; unreasonable people persist in trying to adapt the world to themselves
Honestly, I have not seen few situations in which a domain name holder should have one. The reason the WIPO rules this way is because the domain name holder is almost ALWAYS a cybersquatter--someone just holding the domain name so they can sell it at an absurd rate. The problem is that /. proclaims headlines like GUINESS TAKES AWAY GUINESSSUCKS.COM, ETC FROM INDIVIDUAL and no one here bothers to read the fine print that the domain holder did not even bother to challenge the complain.
People should have a forum for disputing issues. If the disputes are not refuted, then the dispute is won.
No, it is not. That's why Lockheed lost its complaint. But the guinesssucks site was not a site for complaining about guiness. It was purchased by someone for the sole purpose of selling it to guiness at a higher rate. That is cybersquatting.
READ THE FUCKING DECISIONS!!!!!!!!
In the Guiness case, the Responded was someone blatently trying to make money off of selling the domains to Guiness! HE DID NOT EVEN BOTHER TO FILE A RESPONSE!!!!!!!!!!
In the Lockheed-Martin case, there was a very well-reasoned response and the decision on the part of the WIPO itself was very well written and very well reasoned.
Different situations, different results.
What are we going to do with the Swansea University Computer Society domain name now?
http://www.primussucks.com/
Je t'aime Stéphanie
What about www.primussucks.com?
This is the official website for the band Primus. What happens when the owner of a trademark WANTS to have "sucks" in or appended to the name?
If you buy any beverage in Boston you're supporting the IRA... there's a bar on every corner and three in between.
There are four boxes used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order.
A friend of mine registered 'webabuse@', 'technicalsupport@' and a few other 'possibly confusing' addresses with one free mail service - and they didn't notice for 2 years. I think he had a bit of fun with those :)
-- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
to make sure the check was in the mail at least 1 month before the decision was handed down ;-)
If you just give up, you lose. If you fought, you probably could have won very easily.
Fight Spammers!
You say that 80% of the disputes are ruled in favor of the trademark holder. But, what percentage of that are defendants that never respond?
Fight Spammers!
A trademark is to properly identify a company, product, or service.
If you use Xsucks.com, where X is a trademark, you are properly identifying what sucks. If you have mattelsucks.com, you are properly identifying the trademark Mattel, a company identification mark, sucks. It can also come under fair use.
Now under the anti-SLAPP statutes available in many states, the case can dismissed fairly quickly. Also, it has been ruled that trademark cannot be used to silence critism or commentary. See Mattel v. MCA. (the Barbiegirl case).
Fight Spammers!
Let's quit bitching and moaning about it and figure out how to fix it.
My mom is not a Karma whore!
or at least Clay Johnson thinks so.
http://www.slashdotsucks.org/
"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." - Jack Nicholson
Amazing! I had never thought about it, about this *sucks.com, but just after reading this article I started trying:
www.boeingsucks.com
www.airbussucks.com
www.intelsucks.com
www.amdsucks.com
www.microsoftsucks.com
All of them are registered, altought none of the above have any content at all.
I was happy to see that even a www.linuxsucks.com exists!
Disclaimer to the moderators: I am not saying that Linux sucks, I like Linux, only that I am happy to see that a linuxsucks.com exists because it means that to someone it is important enough to start battling against it; I hope you get my point.
Dan Parisi, the guy who won for LockheedMartinSucks.com has already registered a "wiposucks.com".
The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.
Do it man. i will help you with the HTML if you need it ;)
Pithy, yet ultimately meaningless, phrase expressed with gusto!
slashdotsucks.tv
myslashdotsucks.org
e-slashdotsucks.org
aboutslashdotsucks.org
slashdotsucksonline.org
slashdotsuckscentral.org
Bugger off, Richard.
No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?
To truely promote free speech and fulfill their responsibilities to trademark holders ICANN could create a new TLD ".sucks". The conditions of owning a domain in this TLD should specify that if you are the owner or controller of a string in any other domain then you could not own or control a similar string in ".sucks". Thus microsoft.sucks could not be owned or controlled by microsoft. microsoftsucks.com could be ruled out because it is in the wrong TLD with the defendant offered microsoft.sucks Of course till then give them hell. ps. I'll be first to register really.sucks James
----
http://www.msgeek.org/ -- Because you can't keep a geek grrl down!
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
Nobody tried to register these domain names yet?
Excellent article Jamie..This is why I read Slashdot, not for Hellmouth propaganda, or Linux flame-baiting. I read it for well written pieces concerning matters that do interest me...Good thing I never purchased SlashdotSucks.com, even if now I actually have a right to have it.
"Anybody who tells me I can't use a program because it's not open source, go suck on rms. I'm not interested." (LT 2004)
Citizens in the United States have freedom of speech, religion, and press only if it complies with the following subclauses:
There are 456,326,563,743,445 subclauses, do you want me to list them all?
Seriously, though... How can you truely tell me that these WIPO rules aren't a direct violation of the first amendment??
--
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
...and MicrosoftSucks.com is for Bill Gates' vacuum cleaner division. Ironically, if Microsoft *did* make vacuum cleaners, it'd be their only product that didn't suck!
If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
Dangit. Maybe WIPO-sucks is still open... or WIPO-really-sucks... hey, there's plenty of combinations...
WIPOsucks.com, and see how they react to it...
Imagine the situation:
"I have two domain names here -- one of which is owned by an giant multinational aerospace corporation, the other of which is owned by a fat suburban teenage boy in Wisconsin with zits who has no girlfriend. I want you to guess which one is which. The two names are... ready? 'LockheedMartinSucks.com' and 'LockheedMartin.com'. Now -- guess!"
"Uhh... I'm not sure... I'm kind of confused. I mean, these names are really similar..."
I think even a retarded person could figure this out. I mean that, I'm not joking, even a person with Downs Syndrome or who was mentally retarded would not be "confused" because of the "similarity" of these names. No offense to anyone who has these disorders or knows anyone with them. My cat might find it difficult to figure it out, but only because it she doesn't understand English and doesn't care to.
Don't post on slashdot. Get back to work.
Easy. Lockheed's bribe budget is not as high as Verizon's or Guiness'. My theory.
I think this is more likely so that stupid people don't get email from "hotmail_support@hotmail.com" saying "Please send us your password, we need to fix our database," rather than from any motive of squashing your right to say that they suck.
I rang, you rang, we all rang for orangutang!
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
The authorities are deliberately managing the system, so that domain names are not compatible to trademarks. They do so for reasons based on money and power, without any sense of Justice.
.REG as the TLD for the legally required identifier. Format need be name.class.country.REG. So - for example - domino pizza in USA, would be domino.food.us.REG.
.REG !
Though the authorities SAY they have good ideals - to protect trademarks on the Internet - this is a bare-faced LIE. Only those unable to progress ideas through to conclusion would believe them. They only give certain trademarks an illegal dominant position and create a 'cash cow' for their friends in the legal profession. This is demonstrably true and was the obvious intention. Those in pocket of big business would say otherwise.
These domains are to make everyone aware that they have done this purposefully, to allow big business the control of what you can say on the Internet.
They know the answer to trademark problems. I have posted it on this site before. For those that have missed it:
I have looked at the arguments behind the domain name situation and reached logical conclusion. I have been communicating with USPTO and DoC about the problems. I knew they must have already known the logical solution to them. They do not deny it.
Problem is highlighted in cases like etoy versus eToys (e prefix for Internet) - 1,685 trademarks share common word "toy" in USA alone. There are tens of thousands of them in 200 other countries. Logical, therefore, that ALL cannot use slight variations on this common word (as domain name) - else it would "infringe" upon others and cause "consumer confusion".
Basically an identifier, class and country code are ESSENTIAL to identify trademarks on the Internet.
Trademarks outside the Internet has to be set apart by special typeface or script. And use IDENTIFIER of "tm" for an unregistered mark and "®" for a registered mark. Trademarks simply need adapting to the Internet.
I suggest
Just text based area codes for the Internet - If you can use the telephone, then you can use
WIPO.org.uk & SWIPO.org - have no connection with, and wishes to be totally disassociated from, the World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO.ORG - part of UN, payed for (and owned?) by big business.
I also got WoolwichSucks.co.uk, having evidence they defrauded customers over Endowment Policies.
All above is in my considered and informed opinion.
slashdot knows it sucks, so it doesn't bother to sue!
sulli
RTFJ.
I've made plenty of my own. IMO Guinness is about on the same level as Murphy's. Yeungling, while a nice brewery with an interesting history (the oldest US brewery to survive prohibition if I remember correctly), was really doing a better job targeting the cheaper end of the decent beer market. I'll buy a Yeungling and enjoy it but not at anywhere near the same price as Guinness or Murphys. OTOH maybe I've missed some new development from living in Australia the last few years (I deimmigrated last week). Does Yeungling make a proper stout now or are you talking about the porter? If they do make something they call a stout, I'll apologize and retract this paragraph until I get my hands on it.
Sierra Nevada is superb if you like a hoppier stout, but it ain't the same type of beast as Guinness. Brooklyn Black Chocolate Stout is amazing too. Rogue makes nice stouts. Anchor porter might well be considered a stout depending on your standards---and it's great. The list is endless, but there aren't many American examples that are much like the Irish variety (approx. 1040OG, solid hop bitterness, but not much in the way of finishing hops, nitrogen serve, and a heavy does of black rather than chocolate malts). There are vaguely similar alternatives but the closest and most readily available ones are all Irish. (Murphy's and Beamish).
To steer myself back to a state of relevant grace, I think doing harm to the company is a red herring. Companies seem to be claiming that every use of a trademark as part of a domain name is a commercial use that falls under trademark law. Call me Pangloss "Pig" Bodine, but, while it might be legal now, trademark protection has traditionally been rather narrowly construed. I think that in the best of all possible worlds it should only apply to commercial use of a name. Hell, in the distant past, the fact that this guy isn't selling stout would have been enough to nullify a claim of trademark violation.
Does anyone think if my real name is Steve Guinness I shouldn't be able to start up The Guinness Window company without having Bill Gates and the shade of Arthur Guinness on my ass? If some guy falls out his 2nd story window, shattering his leg and rupturing his spleen, due to my shoddy refusal to build a window that doesn't cave in whenever someone leans on the window frame, shouldn't he be able to grab a GuinnessSucks domain name and give me hell? If we let every corporation grab such exclusive rights to their name, then I'd have to change my name to Steve Defenestration and start selling Defenestration brand windows. (Wait---Bill G. probably has already protectively trademarked defenestration as a slur on Windows.) Scratch that: how about XTRAPRerjij123 Brand Dual Home/Outdoor Photon Portals? Would you buy my product once you figured out what it was?
Sorry for the rant. Reductio ad absurdum is dangerous stuff, but tempting.
Correct, Nelson Mandela never said anything of the sort. Mbeki, however, backed off quickly enough that it was hard for me to figure out exactly what he did say. One moment the media were claiming he'd read on the web that HIV doesn't cause AIDS and was basing South African health care policy on that, and the next he was saying that HIV does cause AIDS, Africa needs anti-virals, and all he meant to imply was that there are social factors in its spread that are uniquely African that need to be dealt with, quite apart from the virus. I couldn't tell if it was the media out of control or one of the fastest spin control jobs I'd ever seen.
FWIW, if it's the latter, I'm disappointed. Mbeki always sounded smart to me, if not as charismatic or surrounded by an aura of sainthood as Mandela.
Ok, on one hand I want to see more cases like this where the little guy silences the big guy's lies. HOWEVER, I don't exactly like seeing the little guy's name on a bunch of -sucks domains. lockheedmartinsucks, microsoftsucks, wiposucks, and surely a bunch more. What's next ? BillcoPCsucks.com ? Geez.. some people just have nothing to do with their money (and minds).
-Billco, Fnarg.com
would it be legal for me to make a cola product and label it cokesucks to sell? would the average consumer know that this is not from the coca-cola company, or could they confuse it with the companies marketing folks trying to put out a satire on their own product to make a few $? just a thought..
The only way to have good institutions is to make sure that there is accountability, transparency and they are the products of reasonable democratic processes. Otherwise what is going to stop these people from pursuing their own corrupt agendas. Oh, I know, another "Review Board" that is even more secretive, even less accountable, and has an even wider authority? Do you guys get it yet?
So LockheedMartinSucksSucks.com would not be found confusingly similar to LockheedMartinSucks.com, while guinness-really-sucks-really-sucks.com would be found similar to guinness-really-sucks.com?
Nevermind, no coffee yet -- ah, the chocolate covered espresso beans, now I'm better.
#define tongue_in_cheek
There goes my plan for my vacuum cleaner promotional fansites:
http://-really-sucks.net
#udefine tongue_in_cheek
I donate all spillover Karma to the charity of my choice... Ada was still a babe despite what people may say...
www.jargon.org
If these parody sites were just a little more creative, they wouldn't need to deal with this kind of BS. Check out indenture.ac (formerly known as bigtimeconsulting.com) for a great example.
std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
Any company in 2001 that hasn't registered its corporate name, and all its major products' names before making them public, is stupid and deserves to pay large sums of money to savvy entrepreneurs.
I agree with the anti-corporate sentiment, and I believe in protecting peoples' rights online. Even cybersquatters! But I must present slashdot with a "bad taste" citation for calling cybersquatters (ie. scum that rank only slightly above spammers) savvy entrepreneurs.
From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc
go look at www.microsoftsucks.com. heh.
First of all, great article. Secondly, who exactly controls the WIPO? A country? A couple of countries?
Please fill me in. I'm a complete newbie when it comes to this.
-- bearclaw
Once again, the morons over at butt-WIPO never cease to amaze me. At least they won't confuse my favorite Verizon sucks site with Verizon themselves.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
The www.lockheedmartinsucks.com site doesn't have much to say about how Lockheed Martin sucks... the only relevant comment I could find in the generic www.sucks.com site was this:
Not that I necessarily agree or disagree... just seems like a lot of trouble to go to over a single comment that was actually positive one.
What do you mean they cut the power? How can they cut the power, man? They're animals!
The site has no link to the www.wizards.com, but it does have banners for places to buy their products, along with a message in big letters that they don't sell those products. In all, it's a reprehensible but fiendishly clever instance of cybersquatting. They have a legitimate claim to a domain name that's an abbreviation of their "real" name. Is it their fault you can parse it to be another company's name?
Was mich nicht umbringt macht mich hungrig.
This paragraph from the Dissent basically says that "sucks" domains are similar but not confusingly similar, which, correct me if I'm wrong, was also the Majority position . . . "There the Panel stated that: "Internet users with search engine results listing Respondent's domains are likely to be puzzled or surprised by the coupling of Complainant's mark with the pejorative verb "sucks." Such users, including potential customers of Complainant, are not likely to conclude that Complainant is the sponsor of the identified websites. However, it is likely (given the relative ease by which websites can be entered) that such users will choose to visit the sites, if only to satisfy their curiosity. Respondent will have accomplished his objective of diverting potential customers of Complainant to his websites by the use of domain names that are similar to Complainant's trademark." P. 11."
"Homo sum: humani nil a me alienum puto"
(I am a man: nothing human is alien to me)
My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
This one seems pretty simple to me... I translate the WIPO's ruling much more clearly as, "For shame, Lockheed, you didn't bring a big enough briefcase to the back room."
Either that, or whoever elected WIPO God made sure to put only corporate loving pukes who're more conservative than the Archangel Gabriel on it.
Any other possibilities? Are they just hiring people from the US Patent Office, former Florida Election officials, or anyone else who is chronically blind to the very very obvious?
-Kasreyn
Kasreyn: Cheerfully playing the part of Devil's Advocate to hairtrigger
Major Premise: ICANN is incorporated in the United States and as such its decisions are to U.S. law
.com, .org, and .net are subject to U.S. law.
Minor Premise: The UDRP is an ICANN-issued policy.
Conclusion: The UDRP is subject to U.S. law
Major Premise: The Network Solutions root DNS servers are in the U.S.
Minor Premise: Items within the U.S. are subject to U.S. law.
Conclusion: The current DNS root servers for
Now, if you want to build overseas root servers to replace the NSI ones, fine. Nobody's stopping you (although you might ask AlterNIC about your odds of getting people to use your servers). In the meantime, the U.S. Supreme Court has final jurisdiction over the core DNS root servers in operation today.
There's no "we" in team, only "me"
The reason that WIPO is the center of all these cases and the root of so much bad fortune is that they are blatantly unfair to individuals. WIPO rules against domain name defendants 80% of the time. This makes it an easy for any company or corporation with a domain dispute to take it to WIPO with the expecation of getting any and everything they ask for. This is not nearly such a problem with the other domain arbitrator organizations
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
I thought LockheedMartinsucks.com was their division that created the intake for their jet engines. If ever I would have agreed with WIPO . . . :)
and i have been for about a year now.. i just dont have a trademark in my domain name.. i have a very targeted audiance of about 15,000 people.. all of then students at my university.. the school tried to shut us down with some weak trademark infringement on the schools logo which used to be on the site, they sent some police to my room instead of soem lawyer with a cease and desist order.. i contacted a lawyer for myself and the school backed off.. people can suck all they want aslong as the suck right..
whilst typing in 'google' i have often typed in gogole by accident. it takes you to a confusingly dissimilar place.
It works better with people, like 'mrhendel.usuck.com', but you could refer to a corprate entity as a person, in a sense.
microsoft.usuck.com
Just a thought.
"I have not slept a wink"
01101001 01100001 01101101 01101110 01101111 01110100 01100001 01101100 01100001 01110111 01111001 01100101 01110010
The Guinness family were pro-independence, but were and are Protestant. And they're big supporters of the Conservative Party in England. Highly unlikely that they've ever backed the IRA.
I do, however, prefer Beamish or Murphy's. Not quite so heavy.
Get your teeth into a small slice: the cake of liberty
The premise is that we design Web pages that can do anything you want. Hence the ellipsis.
I think I'm going to go after Vincent Flanders' site WPTS because it dilutes my corporate image. I think that that domain should rightfully belong to me. Any lawyers in the house?
---- Just another spud server.
wiposucks.com
udrpsucks.com
and while we're at it...
dmcasucks.com
riaasucks.com
mpaasucks.com
thisdomainnamereallysucks.com
hmmmm...
Yeah... that's one of the abuses my company tries to avoid, and I have no problem with that. Users need to get in touch with webmail admin sometimes and we should make it as easy as possible for them to do so. Any provider that doesn't reserve those kinds of usernames is negligent and deserve the headaches that result (i.e. your friend's fun).
I don't think webmail providers should reserve "offensive" words like "sucks", "fuck", "sex" etc., however. What happens to user Jeff Uckerman who innocently uses "jeffuckerman" as his email address?
Jetgirl
(hmm, maybe I should get a sig)
Good point. Thanks for the insight.
This may only be slightly related to the trademark protection story, so feel free to moderate me off-topic. :-)
:-) ). They have even made any variation of "hotmail" a reserved or ineligible word that you cannot use in your account's personal information, so you can't have it appear on your outgoing messages. Their terms of use say you can't use their services in an attempt to be defamatory etc.
/. Considering email usernames constitute a large part of people's identities on the net, why shouldn't we be able to use any username we please so long as it's not already in use? I've heard all the arguments for potential abuse (I work for a webmail provider) but I'm still not convinced.
I encountered a similar situation to the "sucks" domains, when trying to get a Hotmail account username. (Yes, Hotmail/MSN is evil, but this was years ago when I was a newbie). After trying a bunch of usernames and finding them all taken, I started to express my ire and frustration by trying variations of "hotmailsucks". They had taken steps to protect their trademarked name against such usage, by not allowing any username to have the word "Hotmail" in it. Pretty smart on their part I suppose, since I couldn't have my "hotmail_sucks_ass" username. (I eventually had to drop the hotmail to end up with a lovely email address that I was embarrassed to share with my relatives.
I guess my point is that email providers have been blocking their trademarks from use for years, and some even block potentially offensive words altogether. I wouldn't have even gotten "sucks" past some webmail providers. No one seems to have gotten upset over intellectual freedom in these cases, at least not enough to post a story on
What do other slashdotters think?
Jetgirl
If you buy coffee in one of the hundreds of Starbucks in Boston (there are lots, and very convenient when you have to go potty), you're supporting the New World Order.
To paraphrase Hitler talking about the Pope
"Just how many root DNS server's does the US Supreme Court have?"
And I suppose the US Supreme Court is going to tell root DNS servers hosted overseas how to run them? Maybe in your USian-centric wet dream.
I can see why the two decisions are obviously different; your average Guinness buyer is a very different sort than your average LockheedMArtin buyer.
A Guinness buyer is usually an impluse buyer, who buys this overpriced luxury beer to be perceived as a snob, an Irish fanatic or to piss off his friends. Really, there are many other, better, cheaper stouts out there, if you don't want to make your own. Might I suggest Youngling, or even Murphys (and when you buy Murphy's you're not supporting the IRA).
A LockheedMartin uyer is usually acting as an agent of government, with millions to spend on expensive airplanes, and they won't be swayed by a false web page, unlike the drunken sot of a Guinness buyer.
Pretty simple, when you think about it.
Lockheed near me is involved with Boy Scout Explorers, a branch of the boyscouts that involves people with technology. We get to build workstation,play with robots,etc. Last year they gave us money to buy a $5000 server... It's great fun, so I think Lockheed is cool.
Never before has so much attention been paid by people of distinction than in the last several years. The WIPO debated 'sucks', the president is involved in a sucking scandal, congress spends $50 million investigating sucking in the Oval Office... Verily these are the end times....
There is no guarantee that the content has been read or understood.
Does anyone own "www.wiposucks.com"?
Douglas Adams
1952-2001 :(
I can feel the heat already. Owner of xdotcomsucks.com
AP just came out with a story from the WIPO kangaroo courts saying that www.brucespringsteen.com has been left in the hands of a "fan" who registered the domain name.
As evinced by the site's own message board, most other fans think this guy is a loser and a jerk, while some think Bruce is being a stuck-up sellout.
Well, many of us knew Bruce was a stuck-up sellout when he started writing about the horrors of being rich ("57 Channels and Nothing On", awwwww...). Personally I think a man's name is a man's name, unless it's another man's name in which case anyone named McDonald or Bruce Springsteen should get no flack.
But what's telling is that WIPO today is doing a lot of out-of-norm rulings. This is a very unsettling thing for the "rule of law" form of behavior control that keeps much of this planet from going Columbine on each other. The Supreme Court may have opened a cultural can of worms by ignoring the right thing in favor of its political gain in the election ruling. Bench activism will become the social norm for courts as they decide that they know better than 1500 years of Justice.
--Blair
"1.3 billion websites and nothing on."
Hah, this has happened before. For instance, the phony religious cult 'Circudu' was totally owned by a nice little teenage angst-pit named "spazntwich." He now runs circudu.com, and is using it as quite a horribly written website. Despite their awful threats of death, spaz retains rights to the domain. victory of the pissant! -Alpha Paradigm
-=The Dude=-
Somehow, I think that these folks have something better to do. But anyway, I gotta run now. Gotta register my new domain thisstrawsucks.com
Sex is heriditary, if your parents didn't have it chances are good you won't either.
Ridiculous that this has to be said, but I'm Irish (i.e., born and bred, not an Irish-American) and we, the Irish, would prefer that noone support the IRA. They're murdering thugs. We showed that with our support for the Good Friday Agreement. If you're a fan of terrorism, go blow up crap in your own country, but please don't support our terrorists. FYI, the IRA is a Marxist/Leninist organization whose stated aim is the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ireland. So perhaps if you fancy the 'RA, you should vote communist in your own local elections... no? I didn't think so. Enjoy Guinness, by all means, it's a fine stout, but it is actually owned by an Anglo-Irish family and is really a UK business (not that that matters one bit).
Hmmm, just realized that since you're from the same part of the World as me, there was likely no need to translate the French for you. Apologies.
Thanks! It was sparked by a comment an Indian colleague of mine made recently. He asked me if he needed to be a congregation member of a Christian church in order to visit one here in St. Louis, as he had some questions on a point of theology or the Bible or whatnot. When I told him I didn't know, he seemed puzzled, "But are you not Catholic?" When I told him that I was an atheist, he didn't seem to recognise the word, so I explained that I don't believe in God and he exclaimed "In India we call that a communist!!!" I had a hard time explaining that while most communists are indeed atheist it's not at all guaranteed to work the other way around.
of McDonald's or Pepsi or Microsoft, etc. And then try and take the domain when the registration period expired or through the UDRP or some other cleverness. But the key is that, when I registered my trademark it would be for the market in 'Unassembled cardboard boxes for the transport of nails' so that I would not be infringing on thier existing trademarks. I'm quite sure I'd lose, but it'd be fun to put a burr under the bonnet (mix some metaphors, anyone?) of Mr. Megacorp.
Brant.
The man with way too much time on his hands.
Brant
Brant
Argle. Bargle.
Or maybe LockheedMartinSucksYourMother.com would be better...
The moral of this story is to react in an educated manner when your rights are violated. Don't let *them* walk all over you and then complain when you have nothing left.
This outcome isn't necessarily breaking with the tradition of WIPO. In the case of Guinness it is stated that: "The Panel does not infer that "-sucks" domain names are immune from scrutiny as being confusingly similar to trademarks to which they are appended. Each case must be considered in light of the facts presented. "
In the Guinness case, the Respondent never responded, and was so unable to present facts affecting the outcome of the decision. Time and again, the panel says, "In the absence of a Response..."
In the Wal-Mart case, again the Respondent never Responed. And he also was attempting to sell the domain name, which constitutes bad faith. This is not the case in the Lockheed decision.
In the Lockheed decision, the Respondent responded in a timely manner and argued in a well-thought out manner.
It's nice to see some people still listen to logic.
While we expect governments to be informed, that's not always the case. There's a rather well-known example involving Nelson Mandela, the former leader of South Africa where he refused HIV treatments to be used because he read on a page that they didn't work, ignoring the obvious facts otherwise. I'm sure I'm not telling this correctly, but it's pretty much what happened. My point is that users (and government leaders) have been misled by sites. The solution seems to be to the trademark issue that the site be required to post that they are not affiliated with the site or company whose trademark they are using.
I demand a manual recount of my karma!
Well, products such as that are what trademarks are supposed to apply to. They're there so that when you, the consumer goes to purchase something that you get what you're paying for and that the product is what it appears to be. I'm sure this would be better placed in reply to a different post, but the beer you mention is a good example of what trademarks are to protect.
I demand a manual recount of my karma!
What I want to see is some company like Walmart try to register walmartsuckssucks.com.
Then I want the WIPO to rule that walmartsuckssucks.com is 'confusingly similar' to walmartsucks.com, and yank the domain away from Walmart.
Bytenik
"Scientists prove we were never here."
-- Devo