Bad Faith

[sneezycheese]

The Taylor wassit issue, does just stop at the whys on the contract, it extends to why they took so long after being notified from external sources that taylor wassit should not be operating the website to deleting it.. That process took further reminders and a suggestion that nominet had "forgot" to delete it... Further to that how on earth did anyone not know the company changed names when they are dealing with them... married to them.... etc etc etc etc........

...To expand:

We know of two independant complaints that were made to Nominet on this issue...

Two DIFFERENT and opposing excuses as to why it had not been deleted came back! :???:

Honesty is the best 'policy' - if you don't - it is likely to come back and bite you!

 

[grandin]

Be realistic

Jay be realisitc.

Patent office have a database of classess (and overlap classess) and the products protected in those classess.

They also have a database of registered trade marks.

You are telling me that you cannot run a program that looks for domain names that include words contained in the two databases and then flags up a query.

Back to the point....You are asking me if I want to buy tescofoods.co.uk. Should you be offering this to me given that Nominet are well aware that (on the balance of probability) such a registration by anyone who is not tescos is likely to be with abusive intent?

And lets not forget that the experts have now ruled that even a tribute site does not need to contain the name of the rights holder.

Can I buy tescofoods.co.uk from you Nominet?

If I do buy tescofoods.co.uk from you are you going to take my registration fees for many years until tesco's the food people come knocking at my door..

Lee

 

[sneezycheese]

Back to the point....You are asking me if I want to buy tescofoods.co.uk. Should you be offering this to me given that Nominet are well aware that (on the balance of probability) such a registration by anyone who is not tescos is likely to be with abusive intent?

And lets not forget that the experts have now ruled that even a tribute site does not need to contain the name of the rights holder.

Can I buy tescofoods.co.uk from you Nominet?

If I do buy tescofoods.co.uk from you are you going to take my registration fees for many years until tesco's the food people come knocking at my door..

...I wonder if any of this would apply, as Nominet 'could' be accused of knowingly 'equipping'?...

One in a Million

 

[domaingenius]

You are playing a cheap trick with language.

Where is there any justification for your phrase "so keen to hold on"? Apart from a few people on AD who else wants to see the DRS outsourced? Where is the pressure that you imply we are resisting?

Jay ,dont take it personally, I just believe that the DRS would be so much better handled by a third party, such as the Patent Office. It make sense from 2 perspectives, one that Nominet could dispense with the hassle ,and two that the Patent Office have so much experience in field of TM violation ,and will know what does and does not amount to TM violation. I agree that if someone registers tesco.co.uk then using it to advertise for food etc then they will rightly lose the domain, but what I am not happy to see are generic domains being lost on basis of someone obtaining a TM for a generic word on the basis that it is in a unique form, and then using that TM to obtain a domain from someone. I wont bother quoting the domains but there are a few debatable ones.

DG

 

[Jay Daley]

Jay ,dont take it personally, I just believe that the DRS would be so much better handled by a third party, such as the Patent Office. It make sense from 2 perspectives, one that Nominet could dispense with the hassle ,and two that the Patent Office have so much experience in field of TM violation ,and will know what does and does not amount to TM violation. I agree that if someone registers tesco.co.uk then using it to advertise for food etc then they will rightly lose the domain, but what I am not happy to see are generic domains being lost on basis of someone obtaining a TM for a generic word on the basis that it is in a unique form, and then using that TM to obtain a domain from someone. I wont bother quoting the domains but there are a few debatable ones.

I'm happy for you to judge us by the way we respond to reasoned arguments for us to change the DRS. I think it needs to be established that we do not run DRS well enough before there is any talk of someone else running it.

Particular problems, like the one you rightly identify above, will happen with any system, whoever runs it. What matters is how it gets changed, if at all.

 

[grandin]

Unanswered question

The question remains unanswered...

Are you, Nominet, going to continue to put in your shop window (browser) the product tescofoods.co.uk? I like to know whether I can buy the product called tescofoods.co.uk? Or does this product not have any rights of use linked to it i.e. not fit for the purpose? To me it seems to be only fit for one customer so maybe it shouldn't be in your shop window but more tucked under the counter.

Lee

 

[Jay Daley]

The question remains unanswered...

I have answered the question, you just don't agree with the answer.

 

[sneezycheese]

I have answered the question, you just don't agree with the answer.

Lee - the answer...

Particular problems, like the one you rightly identify above, will happen with any system, whoever runs it. What matters is how it gets changed, if at all.

...:???: - Problem identified and agreed - but no commitment to try and fix it

Solution: Link into UK Trademark database - set 'basic' registration parameters - when someone tries to register a TM name ask for its intended use - allow the registratoin if it doesn't conflict with the TM parameters set - Job done!

 

[grandin]

Another Nominet classic

Nomient statement then reads:-

If Lee Grandin registers tescofoods.co.uk Nominet would not know whether the mere registration is abusive despite the Citigroup ruling?

Don't you think you should know whether you are selling unlawful products?

Court rulings and experts opinions are providing an indication that Nominet are selling unlawful products. What steps have Nominet taken to quality control its offer of goods for sale?

Lets re-phrase the question, do Nominet accept that they have sold unlawful goods?

Like a machine that breaksdown Nominet must be liable in some manner.

Lee

 

[grandin]

Help

Jay, Can you nudge Ed to reply to my recent email.

Lee

 

[fred]

Nomient statement then reads:-

If Lee Grandin registers tescofoods.co.uk Nominet would not know whether the mere registration is abusive despite the Citigroup ruling?

Don't you think you should know whether you are selling unlawful products?

Court rulings and experts opinions are providing an indication that Nominet are selling unlawful products. What steps have Nominet taken to quality control its offer of goods for sale?

Lets re-phrase the question, do Nominet accept that they have sold unlawful goods?

Like a machine that breaksdown Nominet must be liable in some manner.

Lee

A relevant question would then be:

Is the act of registering/owning tescofoods.co.uk unlawful, or would it only be unlawful if you (miss)used it?

i.e. There are many companies selling devices which transmit music from your mp3 player via an fm signal to your radio. It is perfectly legal to sell, buy or own these, but you are breaking the law if you actually use one.*

[edit]
* in the UK as the law currently stands.

 

[grandin]

good point fred

Thats a good point fred.

Why did the one in million judge set a precedent that allowed experts to pre-judge peoples intent when in other areas of commerce you can't.

I thought we lived in a society where you are innocent until proven guilty.

I don't understand or practise law just try and apply common sense but as one registrar told me 'its not based on common sense'.

The speed camera detectors are they legal to sell?

Lee

 

[Beasty]

A relevant question would then be:

Is the act of registering/owning tescofoods.co.uk unlawful, or would it only be unlawful if you (miss)used it?

i.e. There are many companies selling devices which transmit music from your mp3 player via an fm signal to your radio. It is perfectly legal to sell, buy or own these, but you are breaking the law if you actually use one.*

[edit]
* in the UK as the law currently stands.

True - this was tested in the Amstrad case relating to double tape decks - so it's a little while back! From what I can recall, only if the thing can either only be used to infringe or you encourage infringement are you liable for copyright breach.

With regsitries and trade marks - I've never seen it suggested that merely allowing a registration - by say the TM registry or companies house - rendered the registry liable. That is even the case where some element of checking goes on - as with TM applications.

Also you are right to bear in mind that a TM in one class does not automatically provide a monopoly for use in all classes of trading activity. So there is no necesity of infringement save for in cases with very well known and highly distinctive trade marks - say Harrods.

But does even that mean that a Mr or Mrs Harrod should be prevented by the system from regsitering harrods.co.uk for his own use?

I have sympathy with Jay's points regarding the difficulty of setting something like that up. I have less sympathy with his justification for the DRS...

 

[domaingenius]

I'm happy for you to judge us by the way we respond to reasoned arguments for us to change the DRS. I think it needs to be established that we do not run DRS well enough before there is any talk of someone else running it.

Particular problems, like the one you rightly identify above, will happen with any system, whoever runs it. What matters is how it gets changed, if at all.

Jay, yes agreed nothing is ever perfect, but just thought it would be advantagous to Nominet to not have the hassles associated with the DRS system and be able to concentrate on expanding the business side.

Regards
DG

 

[grandin]

Protecting rights

We should all have the opportunity to protect our rights at the outset.

We should be able to register our right to derive the benefit of our domain name use in our specified classes. As with Trade Marks this should be done with a bona fide intent to trade.

The domain name register and trade mark register should be combined not allowing overlap without examination.

A company name isn't the same as a domain name. A domain name is a trade name but company name does not have to be

Lee