my comment to icann irt-final-report
the direction taken by the IRT report is bad policy and extends some
trademark rights (those of nationally-registered trademarks) beyond the
legal limits established by existing law, while ignoring other trademark
rights (in the US, the state trademarks and non-registered trademarks)
and in addition creates an ICANN sanctioned "trademark right" for words
used in a generic sense as a domain name.
the registration and use of a domain name using a generic word should
not be abridged by any international public policy. note that a
trademark (even a nationally registered trademark) of a generic word
does not grant the trademark holder any rights outside the narrow
classification of his mark. MicroSoft's trademark on "windows" does
not mean that they can stop the world from using the word in a descriptive
sense. but the IRT report extends that limited trademark right to any
use of the generic word in domain names.
this has been contentious nearly from the beginning of the Internet
domain name system, and the original proposition that domain names were
similar to street names (which are not eligible for trademark protection)
has been destroyed (and i must point out) incrementally by the changes
in the UDRP and should the IRT report be followed thru, the public will
be subject to unwarranted attacks by some trademark holders. note that
outside any ICANN policies, the trademark holder has many avenues of
recourse should legally recognized rights be percieved to be infringed.
i urge not only that the IRT report be rejected out of hand, but that
the UDRP be reviewed with respect to fairness for trademark holders of
all types as well as fair to non-trademark users of generic words for
domain names.
respectfully,
Ron Wickersham
rjw@itsmyinternet.org
participant in NCUC
###
my experience commenting using e-mail:
1) i sent the comment at 15:00 PDT.
2) icann uses greylisting, so the mail wasn't transferred until 15:17
3) the confirmation that i really wanted to post was sent back at 17:30 (we also use greylisting).
4) i was out on errands so did the web-based confirmation at around 18:00.
5) refreshed the page every few minutes and noticed that comments apprently are manually posted, and come one or two every half hour.
6) one comment was posted with html tags in the text making it unreadable, but it was reformatted to plain text an hour later.
7) by 21:30 my comment had not been added to the other comments.
8) one could surmise that the long delays between receiving a comment and making it available on the public page is designed to inhibit communication and reduce comments that go back and forth on an issue.
next day my comment was visible on the comments page, and organized in the cronological index back to the original time that it was submitted.