<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Nicolas, Thanks for the question. What
I meant to convey is that the IP community also is opposed to the
proposed regulation on the grounds that there are existing trade
mark protections elsewhere and that this wording would open a
Pandora's Box of problems around domain name fights. Many
registrar's are also against the wording both on principle and on
the practical grounds that it would reduce domain registrations
because of increased risk of litigation (TM protective or TM
predatory) depending on parts of the domain name.<br>
<br>
Sam <br>
<i><br>
On 29/12/2014 9:56 AM, Nicolas Adam wrote:</i><i><br>
</i></div>
<blockquote cite="mid:54A16B83.7060208@gmail.com" type="cite"><i> </i>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<i> Hi Sam,</i><i><br>
</i><i> I am very happy too about this NPOC initiative. Under the
thrust of some powerful NPOs, I sometimes was afraid that NPOC
may not always recognize the value of keeping TM away from
domain names.</i><i><br>
</i><i> I am curious as to why you would say that "</i><i><tt>The
IP community opinion is that this language is unnecessary
(...)</tt></i><i>" though?</i><i><br>
</i><i> Thanks</i><i><br>
</i><i> Nicolas</i><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>