International Domain Name Disputes Analyzed

An anonymous reader writes "Interestingly, there's a new article on Domain Name Disputes, from an international perspective, at the Oklahoma Journal of Law And Tech. It specifically looks at protest or 'sucks' sites."

Comments

Sorry I did not fully explain

[Garry Anderson]

I fully understand all the problems.

I did know that multiple companies can own the same trademark - I have been talking to lawyers for YEARS.

I have also discussed this matter in detail with US and UK authorities.

I sent the following email to University of Oklahoma College of Law:

Please will you kindly forward this to Stacey Knapp.

I would also be very grateful for comments from trademark experts at Oklahoma College of Law.

I hope you will rise to the challenge :-)

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

It seems to me that most lawyers do not want a solution to trademark/domain conflicts - perhaps because they make money from them?

You know that virtually every word is (or can be) a registered trademark - many times over in the same country - and also in different countries.

You know that there is bound to be confusion with domain names.

Is it not obvious - that trademarks have to be identified on the Internet - just like they are in the real world?

Why not 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 .reg TLD could provide a certificate of authentication and directory services - both sadly missing from current system - you would think them essential, so guess why not.

So - for example - apple.com could be directed to apple.computer.us.reg - who else would it be?

This does not replace current system or domains - it does not hinder marketing or restrict in any way - just provides additional increased functionality.

From my communications with US authorities it is clear they know this, but would rather aid and abet big business unlawfully overreach with their trademarks.

You know, of course, ICANN's UDRP guidelines came from UN WIPO, whom are biased towards big business with intellectual-property rights - both in principle and with cash?

UDRP is flawed and corrupt as UN WIPO made it to be easy for their customers to overreach with trademark.

Lois Boland, director of international relations for USPTO identified this bias when talking about open-source software.

Lois said that this "runs counter to the mission of WIPO, which is to promote intellectual-property rights".

Also, "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".

Perhaps though the US authorities do not want solution because the US Registered Trademark System is a sham.

You want proof it is a sham?

As you know - the USPTO can issue same trademark to different businesses selling similar products - concurrent registration.

The law was changed to allow them to do this by mostly ignorant people - in my truthful opinion those that informed them were corrupt.

Do not try to misdirect or muddy the water with honest concurrent use of unregistered marks.

Obviously unregistered trademark conflict cannot be avoided - with registered trademarks it can.

The US Registered Trademark System can at best described as a Zip Code Lottery System - made worse with resellers, national magazines/newspapers and the Internet.

Also made worse if somebody gives a product with US Registered Trademark to you as present - you are then consumer.

How does the US mark identify source?

How do you know that any US registered trademark is unique to one source from the mark?

Just exactly how do you know the registrant has "exclusive right to use the mark nationwide"?

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/doc/basic/r eg ister.htm

If you disagree - exactly why is the US Registered Trademark System not a sham?

Please visit WIPO.org.uk.

I would welcome your critical comments on my informed opinion and findings above and on the web site.

Regards,

Garry Anderson

...sucks.com sites...

[FerretOnMountDew]

If you do a search for sucks on google, you'll notice that about 80% are ...sucks.com (or .org) sites. Most of them suck, though. Notably www.homedepotsucks.com and www.gapsucks.com are horribly out of date and look like a 4th grader dropout was hired to lead the design editor.

One caught my eye, however. And I Am Appalled! This is something that directly influences and affects all of us! metricsucks.com makes some bold, bald faced lies about who does and doesn't use metric!

Not to mention their clearly inferior message board. Suckers.