browse comments: rfc3

rfc3
lytles@neaccess.net
Sat, 20 Feb 1999 10:12:22 -0500 (EST)

Browse by: [ date ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: fezzik@rocketmail.com: "WIPO RFC-3"
Previous message: jdg@rahul.net: "WIPO RFC-3"

wipo and rfc3 attempts to address the non-issue of resolving
trademard ownership in domain names. domain names should not
try to enforce any global scheme of remedying ownership of
a particular set of words. domain names are simply a convienience
for translating something a human is good at remebering to
something a computer is good at interpreting. more succinctly -
there is nothing more similar between

trademarked_name and www.trademarked_name.com

than there is between

robert and seth robert lytle (that is my given name)

those who would suggest that there trademark rights are being
ignored or abused are acting out of selfishness and arrogance that
is not deserved by the situation.

the proposal that you have proposed is tantamount to forcing
an individual to interpret the trademarked_name the official way.
i have no complaint with trademarks - they are good for the companies
that have them, good for the consumer who can count on getting what
he/she expects, good for the economy as they simplify (lubricate)
transactions, good for the individual as they isolate the individual
being confused with the trademark holder. in domain names, non of
these advantages of enforcement of trademarks is maintained.

finally, and most importantly, your proposal is too complicated and
complex. it ammounts to oppression of the individual, taking something
simple and beautiful and functional to produce something confusing and
unusable except by the most wealthy.

(by extension, would a company with a trademark of say 191 have a
complaint against the internet address of 47.233.191.001, or
113.191.001.111, or 191.003.83.62 or ... get the point, names are names,
dns is just a map to get from one place to another)

seth r lytle
lytles@neaccess.com