browse comments: Comments on rfc3 draft - Please address these too !

Comments on rfc3 draft - Please address these too !
Srikanth Narra (kakatiya@hotmail.com)
Fri, 26 Mar 1999 15:42:31 PST

Browse by: [ date ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Australia: "WIPO RFC-3"
Previous message: MB / PG: "Indications Geographiques usurpees sur internet"

I am a domain name registrant, hoping to start my own
service/organization on the internet and was reading the draft document
posted on your site. I apologize for the delay in submitting my comments
(only recently realise your effort) and request you to please address
them as well.

Here are my comments I wish to make...

The draft starts off stating the difference between the www (world wide
web) and the 'real' (traditional - prior to internet) world and how both
are converging and proceeds to address issues arising from this
convergence.

The good thing about it is - it attempts to lay good framework for
resolution of issues arising from this convergence.

The sad thing is - it assumes www is going to stop/stand still at this
point of convergence of www with real world.

While reality is, with the breath taking speed of, innovation www is
transeeding the real world or rather redefining what constitutes a real
world.

Taken in this context the framework / draft seems to have a bias towards
(almost one sided in) accomidating the real world at the expense of
visionary rapidly transeeding world of internet.

1. Especially with regard to trademark vs. domain names, while commiting
domain name holder to the compromise, giving rights to unrelated third
party (possibily a trademark holder) not involved in the agreement - it
provides domain name holder no similar relief nor framework from a
abusive trademark registrating third party (a corporation that might
have acquired a trademark on a word which is an existing domain name).

2. The domain names on www have as much real estate dimension to them as
much as a trademark dimension, by there very nature.

A good domain name is like a prime piece of real estate. While investing
in real esate is considered neither illegal or 'dirty' in real world -
for some reason, the draft seems avoid according even basic respect nor
dignity to domain name holders, with similar investment intentions -
addressing them as a 'cyberpirate' or 'cybersquatter'. Shouldn't picking
a good domain name accorded as much as making a good investment in real
estate ?

3. If the side effect purpose of the framework is to save domain names
for legitimate users and preserve the domain names from running out ..so
called 'protecting' the trademark interests seems to have exactly the
opposite effect, as there seems to a increasing thread among trademark
holders to, now to, bulldoze over domain names, blanketly calling every
possible concatination of words with any trademark word or similar word,
as a infringment or dilution of trademark.

4. The changes need to take place in trademark world as well not just in
the domain name world - there seem to be nothing happening - restricting
issuing of trademarks that might conflict with domain names. Neither are
the domain name holders issued any uninterested third party rights in a
trademark issue.

5. The internet in the unregulated state it is in has surpassed every
single obsticle it has encountered with grace and maturity. Pretty soon
the internet community is going to realize the issue of running out of
domain names and evolve services that address this issue by way of
creation of directories as in real world or improvements in browsers
(free addons to popular browsers already exist, that show list of all
websites with similar word in url).

6. On futher maturing / adoption of such functionality on www or any
unforeseen at this point in time technical develepments that make this
issue of domain names non critical as they are seen today, will the
settlements/judgements made under this frameword subject to re-opening
and re-judgement in the new era at that juncture ? or the rights of
domain name holders are gone forever ? The legal world needs to adapt
and change as well to address this issue. At the every least the
arbitration you recommend, should address the issue of possible retrial
of cases tried under present state of technology, in a 'differently'
evolved world at a later date.

I appreciate your zeal in addresing the issues faced with convergence to
www with real world but please see these issues addressed as well.

Thanking you.

Yours truly,

Srikanth Narra
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com