Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: HR 3028
From: David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 03:10:48 -0700
X-Sender: weightmands () pop radix net Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 08:30:29 -0400 To: Phil Agre <pagre () alpha oac ucla edu>, Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu> From: Donald Weightman <weightmands () radix net> Subject: HR 3028 This may be suitable for RRE or IP. My source is Kathy Kleiman, who has worked for the Domain Names Rights Coalition. Don Weightman >ALERT: The House is about to pass a cybersquatting bill that will erase all >the progress and hard work of the ICANN Uniform Dispute Resolution Process >and ensure that trademark/domain name disputes are decided in favor of >trademark owners. A trademark attorney I know described it as "a nuclear >weapon to kill a mosquito." > >Please notify your Congressman that you oppose HR3028, the Trademark >Cyberpiracy Prevention Act. If your Congressman is on the House Commerce >Committee, please urge her/him to have the Commerce Committee also review >this Bill. The time is now since the vote has been scheduled for early next >week! > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >-------------------------------------------- > > HR 3028 Raises Serious Concerns: > Internet Users Urge Members to Go Slow > >HR 3028, the Trademark Cyberpiracy Prevention Act, has serious defects >that will hurt normal users of the Internet, including individuals, small >businesses and noncommercial organizations. It will create bad will with >our international Internet partners by creating jurisdiction in US courts for >all trademark actions -- far beyond cybersquatting. Its provisions will >drive away massive amounts of international business from US registrars >and the US registry Network Solutions, and end the active and growing >international use of the gTLDs (.com, .org, and .net). > >- HR 3028 wrongly strips trademarks of their connection to goods > and services. It gives rights to trademark owners far beyond any > given under existing law -- and famous mark status to all > trademarks far beyond the few that merit it. Forget the limited > classes in which the US Patent & Trademark Office registered the > trademark. Forget ever having James Plumbing and James Diner > on the same Internet. > >- HR 3028 creates draconian statutory penalties up to $100,000 -- > even if no damage are shown. This penalty drastically > overcompensates trademark owners -- who often have many > domain names -- and at the same time chills the e-commerce > experimentation of new businesses and the creative outreach > efforts of noncommercial organizations. > >- HR 3028 improperly gives US courts jurisdiction over all domain > name cases, provided there is a trademark cause of action thrown > in. The Bill creates "in rem" actions over all foreign and US > citizens who happen to register a domain name with a US registrar > or registry. Thus, the domain name can be revoked even if there is > no jurisdiction over the defendant and even if the defendant is half > a world away. This use of the domain name system to expand one > nation's control over content and will come back to haunt US > citizens as other governments follow suit. > >- HR 3028 reverts to an older system of onerous and illegal private > contracts and ignores the hard work of ICANN. The Bill protects > and immunizes registrars and registries who create biased and > unfair domain name dispute policies. This returns us to the days, > now ending, of the loss and chilling of hundreds of domain names > of small businesses, individuals and noncommercial organizations > under the private policy of Network Solutions, Inc. This Bill must > tie the immunity of registrars and registries to the adoption of the > uniform dispute resolution policy now being finalized through the > ongoing public process of ICANN. > >The Association for Computing Machinery's Internet Governance >Committee urges the House Judiciary Committee to slow down! ACM-IGC also >urges the House Commerce Committee, with its significant knowledge of >Internet issues and proven interest in the welfare of all Internet users, to >review this Bill. >The current bill shows a strong bias to the largest US businesses >who fear the ability of the Internet to introduce bold new forms of >competition. The voices of the millions of small Internet users, Internet >entrepreneurs and small businesses and noncommercial organizations have not >been heard and they must be. > >Kathryn A. Kleiman, Esq., Senior Policy Analyst >Association for Computing Machinery >Internet Governance Committee >601 Madison Street, Suite 200 >Alexandria, VA 22314 >703/518-5184 >KathrynKl () aol com > >
Current thread:
- IP: HR 3028 David Farber (Oct 15)