Another example of how the gov't uses one situation as a scare tactic to pull the shades over Americas and the rest of the worlds eyes while the hidden agenda benefits the people/corporations with the most
"We need to send a strong message to other members of congress that any vote for the bill will be matched by active campaigns to remove that member from congress."
Even more important than contacting the moron sponsors of the bill: Contact YOUR OWN representatives and senators and let them know that your vote for them will depend on how they vote for the bill.
It is important to contact your senators and congressman before any vote takes place. While this is currently a senate bill, be sure to write your congressmen too... these people need to feel the pressure from all sides before any voting.
Marc
__________________
(Just another mathematician obsessed with proving P != NP -- that is a math joke for job security)
Smile! In a few short years you will realize that these are the good old days!
Beyond the literal claims of authorship and public backing of this bill by some senators (who may or may not even understand it), who is actually lobbying for this bill to pass? Who convinced members of the senate that this bill would be a good idea...and why? Bills like this rarely spring forth without some fairly substantial back-office politics, usually having to do with money. It would be nice to know what individual or group is truly responsible for this idea, and if they stand to benefit from it.
__________________ A good domain name is worth more than money.
I've got domains up the Wazoo...wanna buy some?
And Ebay would still have to prove Filterbay it's confusingly similar. The burden to prove their case is still there.
Again...it would be wise for domainers to finally become legitimate TM holders and established their own rights. Why assume I won't have ads? One point in obtaining TM is commercial usage. If anything I would be certain to add advertisers.
If the bill passes I would careful survey my portfolio...probably remove a few from parking, create a logo, add some ads and get some site running to establish my rights. I build 3-5 sites a month..I would just have to step it up a bit. I would probably let some obvious stuff drop too. No big deal. I lose a little income to ensure I am legit and legal. The stuff I would let drop is risky domains anyways. I am sure that's the same for many domainers. They fear their cybersquatting gray area days are numbered...and they are right too.
I am probably one of the few domainers here that considers himself more of a webmaster than anything else. Too many here aren't developers. They park their portfolio's and try to get people to buy their domains. It's not honorable. It's not what the internet was created for. It's an abuse of the system. This bill could end that. Sorry domainers..yer screwed. Eventually you might have to write some html.
If this heinous bill becomes law, imagine the response Big Business with deeper pockets than you will have when the red carpet is rolled out for them to go after your brands, placing interpretation into the hands of the court of whether or not certain letter/word patterns contained in your TMs may be confusingly similar and misleading people.
Ooo...you make it sound so scary and ominous. It's not. There are laws now that allow "big business" to come after your domains. WIPO is EXTREMELY easy to game for them. What's the real difference here?
Imagine if the UDRP didn't exist and it was written into the books today...I betcha there would be a petition against it and doom scenarios to accompany that as well.
Hardly anyone on this forum condones cybersquatting.. You think by not parking your names and putting a logo on a webpage will protect you and your domains from large corporations squashing you like a bug and taking your online assets? Who are you to define what the internet was created for BTW...?
And we need this bill to penalize those using domains to phish. It's a serious problem. The small part about TM violation in domains might be reworded or removed entirely but it's not over-the-top language imho.
Well, in a few years time, we may look at a domain name like bank.com and wonder how foolish the owner was ever to have regged it, if this bill is passed - just as we might now wonder the same thing about people who reg BuyCokeCola.com now. Culture changes quickly as will the value of domain portfolios.
BTW what are the chances of it passing? Is it on mainstream news much over in the US?
Yup. And that the way it always is. They intentionally name them to sound benevolent, like the "Fainess Doctrine". But it's all BS. You have to read the whole thing in order to get the truth, and even then a lot of the time you have to read it many times in order to "get it".
BTW, 1,174 petitions signed. Only 826 more to go to reach the goal. But really, we actually need more that to reach the goal because many of the people signing the petition are from foreign countries and they do not count since this is a matter of US law.
I still have not gotten anything from RJ on this issue. I really wich he would send out a notice of this matter to all forum members like the other domain forum did. This is one of the best things about having a list.
__________________
☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻ Rewrite Text in a Flash! ArticleSpinner.com!
☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻
Because the gTLD (.com, .net, and others) registries, ex. Verisign, are located in the US, it not only applies to US domain owners but domain owners around the world! I've had thoughts that domain registries shouldn't be run by private companies who are under a certain country's jurisdiction because domain extensions are a GLOBAL ASSET. This is what happens. They should be run by a country-neutral, international body.
EDIT!
As well, trademarks can only apply to a specific product/service/industry so it doesn't mean a name containing a phrase similar to a trademark cannot be used legitimately. A trademark can also only be valid when the usage is not the generic meaning of the term, correct? I'm not a lawyer (Little disclaimer : I am not providing any legal advice) but this is what I have heard on here.
I completely understand that, however, this is an Act being pushed by a US senator in the USA. Therefore, any petition brought forth to undermine such an act will only be valid if it has enough USA-based signatures. They will throw out the non-US signatures.
I'm pretty sure that's the way it is. I could be wrong, but it would not make sense otherwise.
Also, I see a fair amount of "anonymous" signers in that petition. I am afraid that won't do. If this petition is to get anything done at all, it really needs to see some action from USA-based signers who are not afraid to put their real name on it.
__________________
☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻ Rewrite Text in a Flash! ArticleSpinner.com!
☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻☺☻
I've always had a strong belief that the people that will be governed and affected by a law should have a voice about it. Americans will have the most influence about this bill because the votes are in their hands but every little bit of support helps, from an American or not.
As I was stating above, trademarks can only apply to a specific product/service/industry so it doesn't mean a name containing a phrase similar to a trademark cannot be used legitimately and that a trademark can also only be valid when the usage is not the generic meaning of the term, correct?
For example, if somebody owned Apple.tld, they wouldn't automatically be running afoul of Apple's (the makers of the iPod) trademark. The scope of Apple's trademark is around computers and other sorts of electronics. Using the domain for a produce store to sell apples would be a perfectly legitimate use of the name.
So...Apple (the company) shouldn't be allowed to take away the domain unless they can prove that the owner is using the domain in bad faith, for example, misrepresenting or using the domain to sell related products/ads and compete against them. If the owner of the Apple.tld has not used the domain and is just letting sit idle, that alone is not a reason for Apple to be able to take away the domain.
blog
zzzz