Hello Andreas.<div><br></div><div>With all due respect you are wrong in your apparent assertion that domain names and trademarks are the same thing..</div><div><br></div><div>That domain names are not trademarks does not imply that domain names can not be the same word as trademarks. If we were to take your representation that domain names are trademarks would you kindly explain to me how the principles of territoriality and product classification, integral to all known trademark schemes in the developed world, are applied online? They are not.</div>
<div><br></div><div>There are domain names that are not trademarks. There are trademarks that are not domain names. They are not the same thing.</div><div><br></div><div>That ICANN was created and developed in a manner that many of us believe elevates brand owner interests above all others does not change this essential fact. Some brand owners have come to recognise this in claiming a 'domain name navigation right' relating to domain names. Of course they continue to claim a trademark based interest in said domain names. They never seem to be satisfied.</div>
<div><br></div><div>In the context of Michele Neylon's letter it is claimed that ICANN by granting so called 'closed garden' gTLD's is usurping trademark authority vested in the nation state. This simply is not true. If one objects to a domain name, gTLD or otherwise, being granted in contradiction to national law, trademark or otherwise, one always has recourse to the wonderful court systems of said nation states. In fact, there are a few of us out there who would like to return to the 'good old days' of domain names being assigned on a first come first served basis and thus forcing mark holders to go to court if they feel their rights have been violated.,,and getting our beloved California public benefits corporation out of the business of tangentially determining aspects of international intellectual monopoly policy.</div>
<div><br></div><div>That ship may have sailed. However the attempt to elevate domain names into trademarks must be resisted. Domain names are identifiers, no more and no less, and may be subject to regulation under national trademark laws as are any other identifier. That intellectual property interests have so institutionalised themselves into the ICANN process, with little internal blowback from anyone other than this Constituency, is sad. It does not, however, change the nature of a domain name, a trademark, intellectual monopolies, ICANN or the role of the nation state.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Domain names are not trademarks. ICANN is free to determine the policy it wishes to follow in assigning domain name licenses in any manner it wishes. There are, of course, practical considerations and the multistakeholder model itself in play but those considerations go beyomd the confines of this discussion.</div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Andrei Barburas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:abarburas@iicd.org" target="_blank">abarburas@iicd.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><font face="verdana,sans-serif">Hello all,</font><div><font face="verdana,sans-serif"><br></font></div><div><font face="verdana,sans-serif">Edward, allow me to contradict you regarding this statement:</font></div>
<div><font face="verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div><div><font face="verdana,sans-serif">"<i>Domain names are not trademarks. Nor are they sui generis i.p. marks. To sign this letter indicates a belief that in some form they are and will make it a be a bit more difficult in the futre to coherently fight efforts by brand owners to further expand their monopoly rights in the domain ecosphere.</i>"</font></div>
<div><font face="verdana,sans-serif"><br></font></div><div><font face="verdana,sans-serif">The best example I can give, is Amazon.com which is an actual trademark (Amazon with and without the dotcom; a list of their trademarks can be found here: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/?nodeId=200738910" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/?nodeId=200738910</a>)</font></div>
<div><font face="verdana,sans-serif"><br></font></div><div><font face="verdana,sans-serif">This issue was discussed in one of our previous mailings regarding "generic" words, like fruits and everyday items.<br clear="all">
</font><span style><font face="trebuchet ms, sans-serif"><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px"><font size="1" color="#6d90a6"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:rgb(109,144,166)"><br>
</span></font></p><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px"><font size="1" color="#6d90a6"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:rgb(109,144,166)"><br></span></font></p><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt"><font color="#6d90a6"><span style="color:rgb(109,144,166)"><b>Andrei Barburas</b></span></font></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px"><font size="1" color="#6d90a6"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:rgb(109,144,166)">Community Relations Services Officer</span></font></p><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px">
<font size="3"><span style="font-size:12pt"> </span></font></p><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px"><font size="1" color="#6d90a6"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:rgb(109,144,166)">International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD)</span></font></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px"><font size="1"><span style="font-size:7.5pt"><font color="#6d90a6"><span style="color:rgb(109,144,166)">P.O. Box</span></font><font color="#6d90a6"><span style="color:rgb(109,144,166)"> 11586, </span></font></span></font><font size="1" color="#6d90a6"><span style="font-size:7.5pt">2502 AN </span></font><font size="1"><span style="font-size:7.5pt"><font color="#6d90a6">The Hague, </font></span></font><font size="1" color="#6d90a6"><span style="font-size:7.5pt">The </span></font><font size="1"><span style="font-size:7.5pt"><font color="#6d90a6">Netherlands</font></span></font></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px"><font size="1"><span style="font-size:7.5pt"><font color="#6d90a6"><span style="color:rgb(109,144,166)"><br></span></font></span></font></p><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px">
<font size="1"><span style="font-size:7.5pt"><font color="#6d90a6"><span style="color:rgb(109,144,166)">Mobile: <a href="tel:%2B31%2062%20928%202879" value="+31629282879" target="_blank">+31 62 928 2879</a></span></font></span></font></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px"><font size="3"><span style="font-size:12pt"></span></font><font size="1" color="#6d90a6"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:rgb(109,144,166)">Phone: <a href="tel:%2B31%2070%20311%207311" value="+31703117311" target="_blank">+31 70 311 7311</a><br>
Fax: <a href="tel:%2B31%2070%20311%207322" value="+31703117322" target="_blank">+31 70 311 7322</a><br>Website: </span></font><font color="blue"><span style="font-size:10pt;color:blue"><a href="http://www.iicd.org/" title="http://www.iicd.org/
blocked::http://www.iicd.org/
http://www.iicd.org/" style="color:rgb(42,93,176)" target="_blank"><font size="1" color="#6d90a6" title="http://www.iicd.org/
blocked::http://www.iicd.org/
http://www.iicd.org/"><span title="http://www.iicd.org/
blocked::http://www.iicd.org/
http://www.iicd.org/"><span title="http://www.iicd.org/
blocked::http://www.iicd.org/
http://www.iicd.org/"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:rgb(109,144,166)"><span title="http://www.iicd.org/"><span title="http://www.iicd.org/"><span title="http://www.iicd.org/"><span title="http://www.iicd.org/
blocked::http://www.iicd.org/">www.iicd.org</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></font></a></span></font><font size="1" color="#6d90a6"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:rgb(109,144,166)"></span></font></p><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px">
<font size="3"><span style="font-size:12pt"> </span></font></p><p style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;font-size:13px"><strong><b><font size="1" color="#ff5c00"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:rgb(255,92,0)">People </span></font></b></strong><strong><b><font size="1" color="#6d90a6"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:rgb(109,144,166)"> </span></font></b></strong><strong><b><font size="1" color="#ff5c00"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:rgb(255,92,0)">ICT Development</span></font></b></strong></p>
</font></span><br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Edward Morris <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:edward.morris@alumni.usc.edu" target="_blank">edward.morris@alumni.usc.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<span style="border-collapse:collapse;color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">I would take exception to the claim that allowing so called "closed garden" gTLD's at all infringes upon nation states "entrenched legal processes" for obtaining trademark protection. <div>
<br></div><div>It's usually brand owners I need to remind of what appears to be a little recognized fact: domain names are not trademarks. Notwithstanding the fact that brand owners want us to treat domain names as trademarks +, that some UDRP mediators seem to buy this argument, that we're left fighting attempts to establish extraordinary protection for famous marks...</div>
<div><br></div><div>Domain names are not trademarks. Nor are they sui generis i.p. marks. To sign this letter indicates a belief that in some form they are and will make it a be a bit more difficult in the futre to coherently fight efforts by brand owners to further expand their monopoly rights in the domain ecosphere.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The concept of a commons in generic terms may be admirable. The concept stands alone and needs not and should not be linked to trademark rights. Regrettably the time to make such an argument with regards to this round of gTlds is in the past.</div>
<div><br></div></span><div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Kathy Kleiman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kathy@kathykleiman.com" target="_blank">kathy@kathykleiman.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Hi All,<br>
I would like to share with you a letter being circulated by Michele
Neylon, the wonderful Blacknight registrar (and the only registrar
in Ireland). It deals with new gTLDs that are "closed gardens" --
generic words that some companies have applied for as new gTLDs and
will keep "closed" -- not open for general second-level domain name
registration. These include some applicants for .BLOG and .CLOUD,
among many others.<br>
<br>
It's a powerful letter with strong free speech/freedom of expression
arguments. Concerns are shared by registries, registrars and
registrants -- and Michele is looking for Signatories. <br>
<br>
Please take a moment to look at the letter, and let Michele know if
you can sign on (name, organization). Michele is cc'ed on this
email, and can be reached at <a href="mailto:michele@blacknight.ie" target="_blank">michele@blacknight.ie</a> <br>
<br>
----- <br>
Here's the full version with current signatories : <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZUNlookOWyaSW8lXfi_37zVFsVk9xcxncvmE0uwPEFY/edit" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZUNlookOWyaSW8lXfi_37zVFsVk9xcxncvmE0uwPEFY/edit</a><u></u>Here
are two quotes from the <br>
<u></u>
<p><br>
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Here are two quotes from
the letter: <span style="vertical-align:baseline;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-size:15px;background-color:transparent;text-decoration:none;font-weight:normal"></span><span style="vertical-align:baseline;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-size:15px;background-color:transparent;text-decoration:none;font-weight:normal"><br>
"Based on our collective industry experience, we are of the
opinion that the underlying intention of Section 6 was to
allow for the operation of closed gTLDs only under very
defined circumstances. </span><br>
<span style="vertical-align:baseline;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-size:15px;background-color:transparent;text-decoration:none;font-weight:normal">Specifically, that closed
gTLDs should be reserved for only those strings in which the
applicant possesses established (i.e., legally recognized)
intellectual property rights, basically brand names. We
believe that this interpretation of Section 6 is inherently
logical especially in view of the discussions that preceded
the opening of gTLDs -- which focused, in very large part, on
expanding choices and opportunities as well as promoting
innovation, for Internet consumers worldwide."</span><br>
<span style="vertical-align:baseline;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-size:15px;background-color:transparent;text-decoration:none;font-weight:normal"></span><br>
<span style="vertical-align:baseline;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-size:15px;background-color:transparent;text-decoration:none;font-weight:normal">"Further, generic words used
in a generic way belong to all people. It is inherently in the
public interest to allow access to generic new gTLDs to the
whole of the Internet Community, e.g., .BLOG, .MUSIC, .CLOUD.
Allowing everyone to register and use second level domain
names of these powerful, generic TLDs is exactly what we
envisioned the New gTLD Program would do. In contrast, to
allow individual Registry Operators to segregate and close-off
common words for which they do not possess intellectual
property rights in effect allows them to circumvent
nation-states’ entrenched legal processes for obtaining
legitimate and recognized trademark protections."</span><br>
</font>----<br>
Best, <br>
Kathy <br><span><font color="#888888">
</font></span></p><span><font color="#888888">
<p>Kathy Kleiman<br>
Internet Counsel, Fletcher, Heald & Hildreth<br>
Co-Founder, NCUC<br>
</p>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>