grandin

I totally agree...I am a simple man and thats why I am good at business....I know how people buy...

It is very simple, I will digest what you have written and reply but this comes to mind...

It was never upto the law or Nominet to decide..........the law and nominet drs is there to put right wrongs when they occur....BUT no wrong is done until an infringement occurs and unless you change the trade mark rules to reflect eu regulations under prior rights then you have a conflict.

EU regulations have set the EXISTING trade mark holders have a prior right....on that basis then no further trade marks should be issued where an existing trade mark exists even if the class is different

Common sense says its a manipulation to give trade mark holders a right to a domain name but we all know a domain name can represent any trade whilst a trade mark cannot

its WRONG

tifosi

The EU 'what is a valid prior right and what isn't' has been an absolute farce, joke and pretty frankly a dsigrace.

In searching through the whois for the landrush2 names I've come across masses of inconsistencies and outrageous sunrise accepted domains.

The name Lee Ansell of ansellandsons has been a name that has cropped up
e.g websecurity.eu has been accepted as a national trademark of the NL! with the mark web&security. So does Stephen Stock, a well known person to some people on here. They've been playing the game EU style, and if the loopholes are there then if not them others.

I thought they'd stamped out on that, but obviously not. The whole EU registry is riddled with invalid prior rights like this.

too late now and eurid have rejected all claims like this and gone all ostrich on us... head in sand.

grandin

James you wrote: Do you really really mean every single word in the dictionary? Blimey! If I remember correctly there's a whole team of editors constantly updating the dictionary on a daily basis, so it is conceivable that trying to monitor every single word could be its own nemesis... but I see your point.

I write: Not hard...the cambridge dictionary has every word on a computer file....run a script and disregard every word at a given point in time

Please explain to me how...lets say the word MEAL gives any trade mark holder a prior right????

Its morally wrong....until abuse occurs you cannot do anything.....spend you time seeking out abusers and make a example of them....that will deter others....you are looking in the wrong hedge

I look on sedo and see many are selling domain names with clear trade mark infringements....polo does not infringe but domain name...pamelaandersonsboobs.com does!!!!! that was a hypothetical scenario but so true

grandin

tifosi you are right...any simple man can see.....I am well connected in the press and powers at be have only got away with this rubbish because the average consumer doesn't care. I posed questions to a well known jorunalist at the mail on sunday and I know its turning round in his brain but does not comprehend......on a plus note I am looking at making a fortune from virtual property developing but sad that morally its all wrong.

Lee

olebean

A subject close to my heart hehe

Grand

Are you suggesting that there could be no other pamelaandersonboobs?

It also seems odd that without representation you assume that infringement does take place.... In other words does the arrangement of letters represent something you have an affiliation to rather than you seeking plausible legitimate alternatives

grandin

your video domain name...the purpose is what???

I am only concerned with fundamental flaws

olebean

Grand

I could take the mick and say have a pet call ronald in ho video?

or I have a pet call ronaldinho...

Either way I have a plan for it which I am unwiliing to discuss and doe no infringe on the name used by th person whos name is not ronaldinho the footballer but goes by that name

As for fundamental flaw, the flaw exists in the data that is displayed on a webpage and not the name.... In some cases, people park the domains - or possibly forward the domain to another domain, which they dont own. Should a domainer be responsible for another companies information displayed on that page, which comes from a further company.

That is like saying I have a field, allowing somone to use it placing advertising boarding on, they pay a some for each advert/sales lead. That person who pays field owner then sub sells the site to another company who then supplies the adverts..... Should the field owner be held responsible for content? Would the holder of that space lose his field?

Jac

My point was, that the dictionary is constantly changing and words keep getting added; which is why I said it could be its own nemesis; because you are trying to make a decision based on something that may have changed at the precise moment of judgement.

Pesonally, I don't think it does, just as I don't think the term "Granary" should have been trademarked by Hovis; but the powers that be (TPTB) allowed it anyway. For the sake of clarity; "Granary bread" is bread made from granary flour, which is pretty commonly used, but (apparently) no other baker can now call their bread "Granary" because it is trademarked to Hovis. I think this one is totally ludicrous. So please don't think I don't take your point.

IMHO, by its very nature "abuse" has to be a pro-active exercise (as in when it is identified or brought to the attention of the relevant authority). To spend time seeking out the abusers of a system could cost millions and would inevitably add to everyone's end price in the future. Why penalise everyone because of infringements by a minority?

I mentioned in my last reply to you that 330,000 applications sought the same 235,000 .eu domain names; so does that mean that 95,000 are potential domain name disputes, where 2 or more entities have tried to register the same domain name? The hypothetical question that springs to my mind is: what would happen if the courts were actually inundated with another 95,000 cases? They are already overstretched. What would happen if the same happened in the DRS or the .eu ADR? Let's assume the Patent Office is handling them; 95,000 cases? IMHO, nobody (whatever body) could cope.

This is why I believe certain preconditions (on rights) have to be set by TPTB in the interests of plain old-fashioned sanity. I accept these preconditions need to be more equitable than they now appear to be.

Regards
James Conaghan
[PAB Member]

aqls

Oh, the disputes we would have.


Yes, very inconsiderate, the court system is a stakeholder too.



What happens to a pamelasboobs domain after that interest/publicity has receded (or ronaldinho, or virgin, or bt in say 30 years time) Does the next best trademark at the time then get first dibs, or should it be up to the discretion of the domain name holder.

-aqls-

grandin

Hi Ole

I must say if I was an expert, which I am not, then I would have concern about your domain name.

My concern would be this:-

The website contains the name of a world class footballer and you have a link from the web site to another well known footballer. If you are knowingly gaining revenue (click through) then I think as an expert I would find it difficult to....

If however the registrar chose the holding page for their own revenue then I think its unfair that you would lose the site. Soon as a complaint was made you would make an effort to stop the holding page...

Very hypothetical....I don't believe 'transfer' is a correct remedy.

Lee