Guest
Greetings from Canada,
Interesting decision regarding the .Com Registrant as it pertains to possible Trademark infringement via the other extensions.
http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/2002/dbiz2002-00096.html
IMHO, although somewhat precedent setting, this in no way resolves the issue regarding alternate extensions as they relate to existing Trademarks, specifically the .Com Registrant. It is also noteworthy that this case was adjudicated by a "Sole Panelist" as opposed to a Group Committee.
Warmest Regards and Thanks for Participating.
Yours For Success,
Darren Ott
E-Mail: mailto: [email protected]
http://www.ApplicationServiceProvider.com
http://www.ApplicationServiceProvider.us
*************************************************
http://www.RegistrationServiceProvider.com
Interesting decision regarding the .Com Registrant as it pertains to possible Trademark infringement via the other extensions.
http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/2002/dbiz2002-00096.html
IMHO, although somewhat precedent setting, this in no way resolves the issue regarding alternate extensions as they relate to existing Trademarks, specifically the .Com Registrant. It is also noteworthy that this case was adjudicated by a "Sole Panelist" as opposed to a Group Committee.
Warmest Regards and Thanks for Participating.
Yours For Success,
Darren Ott
E-Mail: mailto: [email protected]
http://www.ApplicationServiceProvider.com
http://www.ApplicationServiceProvider.us
*************************************************
http://www.RegistrationServiceProvider.com
