RE: [DNS] Domain Names & Trade Marks

RE: [DNS] Domain Names & Trade Marks

From: Adrian Stephan <akstephan§ozemail.com.au>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:57:39 +1100
Dear Kenneth

I have full sympathy with you on this matter. I have been denied my lawful
company name "logistics" as a domain name because Jan Webster deemed it to
be a generic word.  That fact that she approved other words such as
reliability, dependability and a whole bunch of other non-allowed words
(kraft, mtbuller, etc) as domain names is totally irrelevant.  How she can
say that logistics is generic whereas reliability and dependability are not,
simply defies any logic.

As I see it the problem is that Minister's Hockey and Alston digitally
disenfranchised every business name, trademark, etc in this country and
abdicated this to the folks at MelbourneIT and now auDA.  In fact, they
legislated into law the very thing that S-11 and others complain about in
globalisation, etc.  We no longer have sovereignty over our names, we have
to acquiesce to global self-regulation!

I believe the Government, who has a responsibility to protect such names
under the Paris convention, should have put in place the necessary orders of
precedence to ensure that rights, etc were protected.  However, is seems as
if they did not, and more to the point don't give a stuff or even care less.
If you want an enlightening discussion, try and rationalise the position
with their staffs.

Although MelbourneIT and auDA are the public face of this issue, the people
who should be held accountable are Minister's Hockey and Alston.  They
failed to protect our names, and not only that set up a process where as
small companies we make lawyers rich defending our  rights.  The end result
is that we don't and get shafted.  Is this the grand plan!

To me it is a simple issue, the policy should be based on how the Courts
would interpret precedence and not on how auDA and its committee thinks it
should work.

We have got to stop using this euphemism of cybersquatting - call it exactly
what it is - identity theft.  The only person I have seen call it right is
Justice Anderson in the NZ High Court on the Qantas case - "... an
instrument of fraud ..."

The blatant stupidity is that we cannot have our lawful names as our domain
names, but it is a 5 year jail or $60,000 fine if you onforward an email
without the author's permission.  Talk about getting your priorities right!

>From my experience in these issues, the Libs have absolutely no credibility
and in particular Hockey and Alston should be banished to oblivion forever.
The protection of lawfully approved names is so fundamental to doing
business and both Hockey and Alston have failed in this protection.  I think
that this is such a single fundamental failure that, after 37 years voting
Liberal, I cannot see how I can support the Liberal candidates.  It is the
only thing I can do to show my anger at these two people.

Maybe it is time a few of us got together and took out a class action suit
against the Government, MelbourneIT and auDA.

Rgds

Adrian

===========================================
Adrian Stephan (Managing Director)
Logistics Pty Ltd
POB 5068
PINEWOOD  VIC  3149
Ph: +61 (0)3 9888 2366 Fx: +61 (0)3 9888 2377
akstephan&#167;ozemail.com.au
adrian.stephan&#167;logistic.com.au
www.logistic.com.au
===========================================


-----Original Message-----
From: Kenneth Brownsmith [mailto:kb&#167;kb.au.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 6 November 2001 15:21 PM
To: dns&#167;auda.org.au
Subject: Re: [DNS] Domain Names & Trade Marks


It doesn't matter weather they infringe on a trademark or not, the criteria
for registering .au names (new policy) is that a trademark is *one* of the
accepted means...  ( I hope that made sense)

Hence, I have a registered trademark that is being directly infringed on in
com.au, if I want to recover it, I will have to take legal action (According
to Chris D.)  because the auDRP takes, oh lets say an ABN, in the same light
as a Registered Trademark...  (If I interpreted Chris' email properly)

Does Intellectual *Property* mean anything these days ?

So, essentially, if I am correct, it doesn't matter weather they check
ATMOSS or not, if they have a ABN or RBN or something other than a
trademark, they will be accepted anyway...

That might be a little off track, but I think it is an issue that needs to
be addressed too...



Kenneth Brownsmith
kb&#167;kb.au.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Brown" <abrown&#167;golook.com.au>
To: <dns&#167;auda.org.au>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:50 AM
Subject: [DNS] Domain Names & Trade Marks


> With the changing of the Domain Eligibility criteria to include Trade
Marks.
> What requirements if any will be placed on registrars to check the ATMOSS
> data base, to ensure that domain applicants are not infringing a trade
mark.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Adrian Brown
>
>
> --
> This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
> express permission of the author. 324 subscribers.
> Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
> Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.
>
>



--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 324 subscribers.
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.

--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 324 subscribers. 
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.
Received on Tue Nov 06 2001 - 06:07:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Dec 18 2014 - 20:00:12 UTC