NPO/Civil Society Issue in European Union Proposals for Internet Domain Name Policy

[Lori Schulman]

Hi,

To clarify, the IP community brought the issue to NPOC.  Sam has been spearheading our internal NPOC discussions and response.  We were given a list of six members of the European Parliament to write to and 4 Members of the EU.   Sam has the list.  The language proposed within the EU is overly broad and ignores the issue of “context” especially with domain names.   In IP enforcement, context is crucial.    I have also discussed the matter with the NCSG-EC and framed it as one of the few issues where I think the NCSG and the IP community would agree about overreaching.   The proposed language prohibits using trademarks by anyone other than the owner from “using the sign as a trade or company name….or as a domain name or as a part thereof.”    There are commercial and noncommercial interests in opposing it.  The noncommercial interests are that the law could potentially embolden spurious complaints against non-commercial uses, improperly elevating all domain names as being analogous to “a trade or company name” and, therefore, have a chilling effect on non-commercial expression.   It could also be viewed as an expansion of CTM rights to domain names.   This is in no one’s interest – commercial or noncommercial – as I believe that there are many unintended consequences including creating conflict between legitimate rights holders which include NGO’s.

Lori









Lori S. Schulman · General Counsel
1703 North Beauregard Street

Alexandria, VA  22311-1714

P 703-575-5678 · Lori.Schulman at ascd.org<mailto:Lori.Schulman at ascd.org>
[cid:image001.png at 01CC81E2.512C46F0]



From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Sam Lanfranco
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 11:10 AM
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: NPO/Civil Society Issue in European Union Proposals for Internet Domain Name Policy

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.

Sam

On 29/12/2014 9:56 AM, Nicolas Adam wrote:
Hi Sam,
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 am curious as to why you would say that "The IP community opinion is that this language is unnecessary (...)" though?
Thanks
Nicolas




This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of

the person(s) to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is

confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or

have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy,
distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the
sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any

attachments. ASCD makes no guarantee that this e-mail is error or virus free.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20141229/05f3f3b7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2196 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20141229/05f3f3b7/attachment.jpg>