[PC-NCSG] revised draft NCSG statement on staff's strawman proposal

Tue Feb 26 03:53:10 EET 2013

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

thanks Robin and all those who contrbuted to this input, which was
excellent.
Joy

On 15/01/2013 9:35 a.m., Robin Gross wrote:
> Thanks all for the comments and support.  I've added language about
> the territoriality point that Konstantinos and Mary make and
> attached is the final draft, which I'll now submit to the comment
> forum.  The trademark lobby is getting comments in now too...
> 
> Thanks again for all the suggestions to this text.  The comment
> period closes tomorrow, but then the reply comment period will be
> open until 5 Feb.
> 
> Best, Robin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 7, 2013, at 1:10 AM, Norbert Klein wrote:
> 
>> On 7 1.2013 15:08, konstantinos at komaitis.org wrote:
>>> Yes - this is a great statement. Perhaps it would be valuable
>>> to include a bit on nominative use (see Toyota Motor Sales,
>>> U.S.A., Inc. v. Farzad Tabari, et al. No. 07-55344 (9th Cir.
>>> July 8, 2010), Judge Kozinski gave a great analysis, I had
>>> blogged about it here:
>>> http://www.komaitis.org/1/post/2010/07/the-lessons-the-trademark-community-should-learn-from-judge-kozinskis-ruling-on-nominative-use.html).
>>> Also, on the issue of the GPML that is being sneaked in as
>>> blocking, I have written a bit on my book as to how it changes
>>> the face of trademark law - both in terms of territoriality as
>>> Mary suggests as well as on the basis of its philosophical
>>> foundations.
>>> 
>>> Hope this helps.
>>> 
>>> KK
>>> 
>> Thanks, Konstantinos, it really does.
>> 
>> for sharing and interpreting the US Ninth Circuit ruling by
>> Judge Kozinski. As a person not having been professionally
>> educated in law, I often fail to understand some arguments
>> presented in legal language. Maybe a similar situation prevents
>> also others and the public from more clearly resisting the trend
>> to increase trademark protection. But the text you refer to is so
>> clear ? common sense and legal at the same time. That is why I
>> appreciate your presentation, saying:
>> 
>> ?The ICANN community should really pay attention to this ruling 
>> and should learn from the excellent reasoning of Judge Kozinski. 
>> This decision is really a victory for many legitimate domain
>> name holders who lose their domain names...?
>> 
>> 
>> I even want to quote here some more in full and highlight from
>> what is under the URL you gave, in the hope that we all feel
>> encouraged to state again what is important ? and what is legal,
>> according to the ruling by the Judge Kozinski:
>> 
>> ?Further, the Ninth Circuit upheld the importance of the First 
>> Amendment in the context of trademark law stating that ?Speakers 
>> are under no obligation to provide a disclaimer as a condition
>> for engaging in truthful, non-misleading speech?. Judge Kozinski,
>> even asserted that thousands of sites make ?nominative use? and, 
>> contrary to the way consumers are portrayed under ICANN?s 
>> trademark policies, in reality consumers are both sophisticated 
>> and not easily mislead. On the other hand, a number of sites
>> make nominative use of trademarks in their domains but are not 
>> sponsored or endorsed by the trademark holder: You can preen
>> about your Mercedes at mercedesforum.com and mercedestalk.net,
>> read the latest about your double-skim-no-whip latte at
>> starbucksgossip.com and find out what goodies the world?s
>> greatest electronics store has on sale this week at
>> fryselectronics-ads.com. Consumers who use the internet for
>> shopping are generally quite sophisticated about such matters and
>> won?t be fooled into thinking that the prestigious German car
>> manufacturer sells boots at mercedesboots.com, or homes at
>> mercedeshomes.com, or that comcastsucks.org is sponsored or
>> endorsed by the TV cable company just because the string of
>> letters making up its trademark appears in the domain?.?
>> 
>> ?It is the wholesale prohibition of nominative use in domain
>> names that would be unfair. It would be unfair to merchants
>> seeking to communicate the nature of the service or product
>> offered at their sites. And it would be unfair to consumers, who
>> would be deprived of an increasingly important means of receiving
>> such information. As noted, this would have serious First
>> Amendment implications. The only winners would be companies like
>> Toyota, which would acquire greater control over the markets for
>> goods and services related to their trademarked brands, to the
>> detriment of competition and consumers.?
>> 
>> Thanks, of course, also to all others who have contributed to
>> the response to the Strawman Proposal.
>> 
>> 
>> Norbert Klein _______________________________________________ 
>> PC-NCSG mailing list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org> 
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street, San
> Francisco, CA  94117  USA p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451 
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org 
> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG mailing
> list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org 
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRLBWGAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqKJYH/0ka75VJmGXaoT8T4HRHakiO
Qz57IXyHF4GqHTBV5ntFp3gLGQ2VmPp/3z9vv/kPMqg+e3q17XTHhgQQMEHl58Qp
9Sg+GlP284qOFJq2UDstHxs1KY3oPPDj0kA8yTFT7+os5LIl9fJzJAQK4UagAibL
jTaSBO/m8BOQ9JaqbxJBuEJO5hAvJdiSZubADN4G2hJdIqQ6U1VnaMU+cxdGETlW
527ZmVioRHLtiKiN6RwHYmjkQUdhNDbsARVzUoh3u2BLNunJDnHu1vuKL4pJ4iZd
NhySwkaIBSIzfRpdlmV13gJMQt73p8lsHOUvNitcP/H89DjoiprcVAqkGVDXHF4=
=FNbi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----