World Intellectual Piracy Organization - WIPO.org.uk
Announcement - from skilful.com
This site directly addresses the root cause of trademark and domain name problems - intentional pun.
Fact: The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO.org) and the United States Department of Commerce (DOC.gov) are hiding the simple solution to trademark and domain name problem.
Trademark Law is UNAMBIGUOUS - a mark is allowed for SPECIFIC goods or service ('class') in SPECIFIC country.
The corrupt authorities illicitly aid and abet overreaching corporations to flout trademark and competition law. With open disrespect and contempt, they mock peoples and small business rights to use dictionary words.
There is no tort - yet UN WIPO take domains from registered owners to give to big business for cash - domains like JT.com which can be used for anything legal.
Even though these words are trademarks, it may be possible for you to register as a trademark yourself in a different classification or country.
You can have trademark - but not domain name. This is what makes the whole thing a pathetic joke.
Indeed - you can legally use any word, words or initials to start a new business without registering a trademark - providing you are not passing off, of course. Take for example the word 'apple'. It is legally used by thousands of businesses - large and small all over the world. Indeed, it is impossible that they all register themselves as trademarks - they are bound to conflict with many others, being confusingly similar. In my local phone book alone, there are at least five using this word - two garages (seems not connected), a car centre, fruit growers and a decorating firm.
Also - why prevent people using any words for personal sites? Everybody has legitimate rights to use ANY words for ANY legal purpose they wish - true or false?
The registered trademark symbol ® (called 'R' in a circle or RTM) identifies them in physical world - is not it obvious, that in the vast ocean of domains (mostly non-trademark), something is needed for same function in cyberspace?
You may be surprised to learn that the solution is easier than using the telephone. It adds unequivocal trademark identification and directory functionality - with absolutely no restrictions or requirement to lose current domains.
The US Patent and Trademark Office virtually admitted this, August 22, 2000: "The questions you raised with respect to trademark conflicts, as well as the proposed solutions, have their basis in good common-sense. As such, they have been debated and discussed quite exhaustively within the USPTO, the Administration, and internationally."
The solution was ratified by honest attorneys - including the honourable G. Gervaise Davis III, UN WIPO panellist judge.
Three More Objective Facts:
1 - virtually every word is (or can be) registered as a trademark many times over by different type of business in same or different country e.g. the word 'apple' is registered by tobacco and computer companies in the US.
2 - the only way to avoid confusion with ordinary domain names is to have some sort of identifier to identify them - to replace registered trademark symbol ® - like a protected .reg TLD.
3 - all registered trademark words can be uniquely identified by name.classification.country.reg - e.g. apple.computer.us.reg
Find one lawyer to deny those three simple facts - you will not. A few honest ones have even admitted them.
Most businesses use the same words as many others. Corporations have no desire at all to prevent confusion on the Internet - they just wish illegal dominance of it and to muffle justified criticism. Authorities are afraid to face these three simple facts.
How else can people identify registered trademark domains - unless it has some sort of identifier?
Every domain name will likely be similar to a registered trademark - ask the authorities why they do not want people to know which domains belong to registered trademark.
The authorities have bastardized words to give them one use - as an unlawful fatally flawed trademark system.
Vint Cerf said (April 1999), "The Internet IS for everyone - but it won't be unless WE make it so". Although, working for WorldCom, his position seems to have changed somewhat. One of the fathers of the Internet, he was appointed chairman of ICANN - the U.S. Government QUANGO who gave the Domain Name System (DNS) to the corporate world.
This site certainly is not anti-authoritarian, but in fact highlights the misuse of authority. Please note that very important distinction. There is explanation of how those at the top abuse this power. This is pro-trademark - so please, no spin from corrupt or ignorant critics. Who would want anybody to be conned by some fraudster passing themselves off as trademark holders?
You will find only rational and logically reasoned findings here - no egotistical claim that I discovered the solution. It is most obvious that the authorities must have always known it - indeed, it is indisputable that the answer was self-evident.
Yet the US Department of Commerce refuse to CONFIRM or DENY the ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS to exclusively identify ALL trademark domains. They could be made unique and totally distinctive, as the LAW requires trademarks to be. Authorities are too cowardly to admit this will make domains compatible. To refuse to answer, is to be without honour.
This is most important, as virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over. MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with five trademarks in US alone (please check). This could be any acronym or initialism - including the famous International Trade Centre (ITC) or International Monetary Fund (IMF). They are using the DNS so that conflict is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.
Most trademarks share same words with MANY others - 879 share 'toy' - 1746 share 'cat' - that is just in US alone. How do you know you will get the one you want, when you type name into address bar? So then - 'consumer confusion' is just a bull* excuse used in UDRP. All domains are 'confusingly similar' to trademarks. Authorities have no desire to prevent confusion - else they would include exclusivity's. Authorities have no respect for trademark or competition law - only one can use cat.com or toy.com.
The Department of Commerce allow this conflict to continue purposely, knowing they abridge peoples right to use these words - even common words you learnt with your A B C's - apple, ball and cat. WIPO even took the initials JT.com from Israel citizen for Japan Tobacco. People have every right to use words for whatever legal reason they wish. If the printing press was invented today, they would stop you using all words as title for your book.
To continue the book analogy. The domain name can be used to communicate title, or tell of subject, or give author. The domain name as title may be picked because it sounds good or is easy to remember. The domain name as subject would tell readers what they will find within. The authorities would have you believe that it is always the author. Countries and places give same false argument. If you wrote a book entitled 'South Africa', do the rights to this book belong to that countries government?
The authorities would give all books about countries to the government, or any book about a business or famous person to them - critical or otherwise. This is in open TLDs remember - people have every right to use domain for whatever legal reason they wish.
You cannot make your own small business using a dictionary word, it is bound to conflict with some trademark or other - check any word yourself in US then UK then other 200+ countries. People also cannot make fan sites - or protest about corporations (two of the reasons why they do not want it). The American Department of Commerce violate their own First Amendment.
UN WIPO will not guarantee that your domain is safe - even if you check all their sources: "any searches using the links provided on this site will not be sufficient to determine definitively whether or not the domain name is infringing." Your domain name will never be safe - it could be taken from you at any time in the future.
The authorities are allowing certain trademarks to be abused by their owners, giving them UNLAWFUL dominance over others (and over businesses without trademark) e.g. Caterpillar tractors claimed 'cat' is 'their' trademark on the Internet - even though hundreds of trademarks use the word 'cat' - in US alone (see yourself). The United States Department of Commerce and the World Intellectual Property Organization do not seem to mind that all trademarks fight it out - or that one has this illegal dominant position. This is against Trademark and Competition Law in all countries:
e.g. Australian Trademark Act 1995, section 23: "If trade marks that are substantially identical or deceptively similar have been registered by more than one person (whether in respect of the same or different goods or services), the registered owner of any one of those trade marks does not have the right to prevent the registered owner of any other of those trade marks from using that trade mark except to the extent that the first-mentioned owner is authorised to do so under the registration of his or her trade mark."
I have been in contact with various Government bodies (US and UK) and attorneys for quite some time now - they understand arguments perfectly. Please see latest email to UK Patent Office to see rationale behind the solution. On the 22 June 2001, they admitted, "...a TLD '.reg' has been well understood by the Patent Office for several years...". Nobody has denied the assertions made, not even UN WIPO. Please click this link to see main arguments and the reasons they do not want solution.
These are the true findings and logical opinion of Garry Anderson from UK skilful.com. Critics, unable to find reasoned argument against, have used feeble excuses (watch out for spin). Please note - skilful is the 'proper' English spelling, it has single L's ;-)
Trademarks are for the good of the people, as well as business. Attorneys would say, "The basic tenet of trademark law is to protect consumers and trademark owners from confusion in the marketplace".
Trademarks 'raison d'être' is to identify source of goods or services - not claim world rights to a word.
The Domain Name System was not designed as a fatally flawed UNLAWFUL trademark system, ask creator Paul Mockapetris. He designed it for the function of naming resources. He was asked, what do you wish you had invented? He replied, "A directory system for the Internet that wouldn’t be controlled by the politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats."
Millions of Top Level Domains are possible - Apple Computers could challenge them all for apple.[TLD] - or get in Sunrise without ever giving them a chance. What is the point then, in ever having any new TLDs?
Trademark holders do not own the vast majority of domains - it is obvious that something is needed to highlight them - to replace the registered trademark symbol ® (called 'R' in a circle or RTM). A new protected TLD of .reg would do that. This is for the same reasons, primarily to advise people that the mark is legally registered and protected by law. It will also protect it from 'squatters' - in the same way that nobody can get a US Government .gov site.
It should be noted - this does not stop the use of current domain being used for advertising and marketing purposes.
The solution is easier than using phone, and will remove EXCUSES of 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and 'passing off'.
ICANN President Stuart Lynn and Chairman Vint Cerf admitted about the use of restricted top-level domains to Reuters. "More people I talk to think it's the more likely direction," said Llyn. I wonder why UN WIPO or US DOC did not tell them - (not).
Incidentally, you may be interested where ICANN money is going - to their Lawyers JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE
UN WIPO 'experts' say they are stumped for solution. They have been proven ignorant or dishonest, just using elementary logic.
Hardly independent or unbiased; guess where UN WIPO gets most their money from?
Sorry to tell you this; I have been straightforward with the authorities, but if they fail to put the identity of trademarks beyond all reasonable doubt - they are either devoid of intelligence or corrupt. It is not just the fact that money and abuse of power are involved - but based on their actions and response, in my honest opinion - there is no doubt in my mind - they are corrupt.
Professor Milton Mueller (Associate Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies) recent study: "Conclusion: Domain Names are not Trademarks". To be trademarks he states, "If this is true then the exclusivities associated with business and product names should be applied systematically to them."
The exclusivity's are obvious:
That it is a registered trademark - given that ALL words are trademarks
and so can be confused with other domains.
2. The country of the trademark - given that ANY word may be (is) used by different business in DIFFERENT country.
3. The type of business (classification) - given that ANY word may be (is) used by different business in SAME country.
I used the same words myself to both Nominet UK and UN WIPO: "A fact for you: domain names are not trademarks - ask Paul Mockapetris, creator of Domain Name System." And "In conclusion, to reiterate - domain names are not trademarks."
Phoning is very simple. People understand perfectly that when they phone somebody abroad they have to find country code, area code and number - do they not?
Easier than using the telephone? Yes - try this: Which do you think is Apple Computers phone number in the US?
Do not know? Okay then, try this: Which do you think is Apple Computers website in the US - if .reg was introduced?
Not at all difficult, was it?
Why is there no research into this very important problem? Think about that for just a second. Because they know. Why does corporate controlled media not report on a site that uses same WIPO name? It presents validated evidence that the authorities know the solution to stop 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and 'passing off'. Is it not even slightly newsworthy?
This site is protected as free speech. These are legitimate concerns. Domain is not for sale, at any price.
Simple questions about Sunrise and UDRP:
1.ICANN and US DoC prevent small business (without trademark) from getting their name - instead giving priority to corporation (with trademark). Why is this not restraint of trade - a wilful violation of Antitrust Law?
2. ICANN and US DoC prevent a free market on the Internet - they give corporations (with trademarks) a monopoly of Internet trade. What about the SHERMAN ANTITRUST ACT? It states:
§ 2 Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2
Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty
Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
3. They abridge words that people use on the made-up excuse of preventing fraud. What about law relating to government overreach?
38. However, the government cannot overreach in its attempts to protect the public from fraud. Laws that primarily prohibit fully protected speech along with potentially fraudulent speech often violate the First Amendment, even if the law's stated purpose is to prevent fraud; instead, more precise measures must be used. Likewise, the government cannot label certain speech as fraudulent so as to deprive it of First Amendment protection.
Quote: "even if the law's stated purpose is to prevent fraud; instead, more precise measures must be used."
This means government cannot let trademarks stop people using any words on the excuse of preventing fraud - a more precise measure MUST BE USED e.g. adding a protected TLD to identify that the domain is a trademark - like .reg for example - duh!
THE SIMPLE SOLUTION?
So then - the type of business (e.g. computer or record industry) is called trademark classification (can be subclass).
Most trademarks share the same words with others in a different class or country. Indeed as it is the only possible way to avoid 'consumer confusion' or 'trademark conflict' on the Internet, it is essential to include the classification and country.
Like stated, a new 'protected' Top Level Domain (TLD) is required to replace the ® trademark symbol e.g. .REG. This acts as certificate of authentication. There is no restriction on business, it can still use current/new domain, just directed to dot REG.
This TLD is required for the same reasons, primarily to advise people that the mark is legally registered and protected by law. It will also protect it from being copied - in the same way that nobody can get a US Government .gov site.
.REG is also essential for another reason - basically ALL WORDS are trademarked. So using this TLD, they do not abridge the use of these words from the people. Therefore solution to avoid these problems is name.class.country.reg - simple!
.REG also acts as directory - if you can use the telephone, then you can certainly use dot REG. It is best shown by this graphic:
The consumer enters apple.com and is directed to apple.computer.us.reg - this allows all other TLD to be used without 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and also stops people 'passing off' as Apple Computers.
If Apple Records UK, using apple.record.uk.reg, later gets apple.tld - when consumer enters apple.tld they could be safely directed to apple.record.uk.reg - without any of these problems.
Like I say, as well as acting as certificate of authentication, when entered directly, .reg can also be used as a directory.
The authorities must have always known the solution - it is so obvious. They have virtually admitted as much. Coming to this solution so quickly, I thought there must be something missing. Nothing in last two years has shown the solution to be wrong.
Please be aware, the satire below is after a year of frustration.
This is at at the cowardice of US Government Authorities. In their replies they refused to confirm or deny that this solution would separately and uniquely identify all trademarks. They have contempt for peoples rights and have duplicitous motives.
Yes, it is true - every common word appears trademarked - each word many times over. By giving trademarks priority, even without solution, they violate First Amendment. They now have a Sunrise Period for new 'open' TLD, to give trademark eminence.
The solution is nothing radical - it is the only fair and equitable answer.
The authorities have been using lies and propaganda; As example, ask them to deny this:
THOUSANDs of new 'open' TLDs will not solve any problem - even if every one has 'Sunrise Period'
It will not solve 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' or stop anybody 'passing off'.
Also, as an example on Sunrise, thousands of trademarks using word 'Apple' have no guarantee of being able to use name.
Apple computers will still protect and make claim to every Apple.[anything] - even though they share word with 727 others in the USA alone (plus all those in 200+ countries).
Sunrise gives Big Business priority over the people and is unfair to small businesses without a trademark.
If what they say is true, then ICANN has approved Afilias 'cybersquatting'. They allow them to squat on thousands of domains.
ICANN have give Afilias 150 domains, so far. ICANN allow Afilias the domain search.info:
Afilias is squatting on UK trademarks for SEARCH: 1056333, 1109576, 1291170, 1380291, 1380292, 1436692, 1436693, & 1459763.
Afilias have - about.info - squatting on UK trademark E1216811 - ABOUT
Afilias have - address.info - squatting on UK trademark 1443487 - ADDRESS
Afilias have - directory.info - squatting on UK trademark 276801 - DIRECTORY
There was no need for Afilias to cybersquat on search.info - they could use search.afilias.info.
It is a LIE to say that these domain names are required for essential operational purposes.
They are 'cybersquatting' on these UK trademarks - look for yourself at the other 200+ countries.
Either domains are trademarks OR they are not - one LAW for them and another for us.
They now have to admit the TRUTH - domains are not trademarks and cannot be used as such.
THE SOLUTION MAKES TRADEMARKS AND DOMAINS COMPATIBLE.
Unless you are familiar with it all, I will have a hard time getting over how bad problem really is.
By not using solution, trademarks have priority, this stops free speech.
It is a fact: domain names were not designed to be trademarks - Nor can they be used as such.
One reason: As shown above, MOST trademarks share same or similar name with many others e.g. Caterpillar tractors claiming 'CAT' - above hundreds of other trademarks. Conflict is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.
They ALL legally have to protect their 'cat' trademark. For only one business to use, gives it dominant position over all the others. This is against 'unfair competition' laws.
Like stated earlier, the United States Department of Commerce and the World Intellectual Property Organization do not seem to mind that all trademarks fight it out - or that one has this illegal dominant position.
IMPORTANT - What about free speech? The 'cat' was on this earth long before these tractors. Did Adam and Eve take a bYte out of a Computer ;-)
Proper use of trademark requires ® to give warning, to advise the public that mark is legally registered and protected in law. A new TLD of .REG will do the exact same thing - and much more. So, why do you think they not want it? Are they corrupt?
They have no logical answer against it. The only people I ever criticized, are those that deny free speech and those that libel me.
I will not let this rest. Some use dirty tricks to try stop me, but I will have the last word.
The Internet can do great good, it can give the people a voice. How can it do so - if we are gagged?
The authorities know the simple logical solution to trademark and domain name problem
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF TRADEMARKS?
So consumer can identify the source of goods or services.
Why then, do the authorities not want the solution?
THE US AUTHORITIES FINAL FINAL ANSWER
The USPTO and DoC could not deny this would separately identify all trademarks.
They said (after much time and numerous emails) - class, country, and .reg separately each are generic - basically ignored. This was the SPIN they use.
This is the same as them saying that the registered trademark symbol should be ignored - that is generic to them ALL.
They fail to acknowledge that taken as a whole, with the name, makes it unique and totally distinctive. Only a corrupt government would say that the classification and country should be ignored for a trademark.
This excuse is so poor that it does not even qualify for the feeble excuses link - perhaps I should start up a pathetic excuse link.
I have heard every excuse possible, some are really very poor - watch out for spin.
The real reason - all businesses WANT be <name>.<anyTLD> (especially .com) - above all others of same name.
IT IS UNLAWFUL FOR ONE TO DO THIS AND IMPOSSIBLE FOR ALL TO HAVE.
With .reg they will be able to use <name>.<anyTLD> without any consumer confusion, conflict or passing off problems.
Many claim 'consumer confusion', authorities make it IMPOSSIBLE to avoid with this system. Current usage goes against 'unfair competition' laws. Many people WANT to go faster than speed limit - but there are reasons why laws are in place, to stop them.
The US DoC could stop trademarks breaking 'unfair competition' law and the abridgement of speech - instead they aid and abet.
Can you tell apple.record.uk.reg from apple.computer.uk.reg?
All other 'Apple' trademarks could then use their mark on the Internet, without conflict.
YES - it is obvious that this would enable all trademarks to use their mark on the Internet.
Will you be like those that have read this before you, and hide the solution?
15 June 2001 - Please visit U.N. WIPO site - to see my comments for Interim Report
29 June 2001 - Latest email to the UK Patent Office
2 August - they replied, disappointingly refusing to answer and said it is nothing to do with them.
In my opinion it was cowardly not to do so and, given the injustices, lacking in honour.
Proof the UK authorities know solution also:
In prior email from them, on 22 June 2001, they admit, "...a TLD '.reg' has been well understood by the Patent Office for several years...".
6 July 2001 - Informed EU Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market
UN WIPO wish to expand UDRP - for the most part this is not for any 'squatting' reasons. Restricted TLDs will enable all so-called rightful owners to get prime representation.
Amongst other things the expansion is to give Governments greater tyrannical powers - specifics e.g. the SouthAfrica.com case: Analogy, if you wrote a book entitled "South Africa" - what imbecile would believe book belonged to South African Government?
This one single SLD is not stopping the Government - they could have many millions of SLD. They have the whole .za ccTLD for goodness sake - so could use SouthAfrica.za, Government.za or [any].gov.za - The US Government could even give them SouthAfrica.gov (no chance).
Please be aware, this satire is after a year of frustration, at the cowardice of US Government Authorities refusal to answer.
Does someone have a domain that YOU want?
Order it NOW - from
You obviously want your trademark - but nearly all are common words or initials. Every word is trademarked, most many times over. Each one is shared by trademark holders all over world.
Yes, clever people registered common word domains first - it is their Intellectual Property. But we can get it for you.
You will then have dominance over other trademarks that share this mark with you. Beat them to it - get in first - get in quick.
The Secretary of United States Department of Commerce has many friends in big business. He wishes to take words that belong to everyone and give them to his chums.
He wanted to find a way to legally give corporations priority over people for these words.
We are the experts that made the rules allowing this to happen. We gain in authority and financially for this effort, of course.
We can SWIPE any word(s) you wish. Order it NOW.
ACCESS & VISA accepted.
FOR UN WIPO & US DoC LAWYERS - THIS IS SATIRE DIMWIT
Original SWIPO press release
Has the Secretary for US DoC (Department of Chickens) any honour? Will he grow to be a chicken or man?
We ask Don 'Littlechick' Evans (TM) a question:
Please tell us Don - is identifier, like ®, class & country ESSENTIAL to identify trademarks on the Internet?
Don 'Littlechick' Evans chirped, "Don't know what all this darn fuss is about - they're JUST WORDS for heavens sake. Cheep, cheep, cheep."
"Okay - Okay - you got me there. Yes, WORDS do belong to everybody - but WORDS are dangerous in the hands of you little people. Cheep, cheep, cheep."
"It is better that we give these WORDS to big business. Cheep, cheep, cheep."
"See what I mean - you made me say that. Bloody little people. Cheep, cheep, cheep."
"I am taking the fifth - go away. Cheep, cheep, cheep."
He then started using fowl language - and avoided question.
Looks like he is a chicken after all.
Don 'Littlechick' Evans is a trademark of SWIPO.org (TM)
All is my true considered and informed opinion - GA - The logic is sound - skiLfuL.com
(Oxford English Dictionary)
Endowed with reason; rational; also, following reason, doing right.
Reasonable, just, proper.
Having practical ability; possessing skill; expert, dexterous, clever.
Q.E.D. (Quod Erat Demonstrandum) [L.] Which was to be proved or demonstrated