"Thanks" is Trademarked!
..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com as well! I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1 So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3 -Carlton [Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.] ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
Not sure anyone needs to be tarred and feathered here. But let's get the facts straight. (Perhaps those who don't get the facts straight are the ones who should be tarred & feathered, etc., but that seems rather harsh. I prefer to educate rather than vilify.) Citi did not sue AT&T for "using the word in a commercial." Citi sued AT&T for apparently seeking to brand its new customer loyalty program as AT&T THANKS when Citibank already has a longstanding (since 2004) customer loyalty program branded as CITI THANK YOU, with about 15 million members in the US, and a trademark registered since 2011 for "Promoting the goods and services of others through administration of incentive reward and redemption programs by distributing rewards for credit and debit card use, and for banking and wealth management customer *loyalty*". And AT&T didn't merely use the THANKS brand, they applied for a trademark registration for AT&T THANKS for "Providing incentive award programs for customers for the purpose of promoting and rewarding loyalty." It seems like an entirely reasonable claim that consumers could be confused between a THANK YOU brand loyalty program and a THANKS brand loyalty program. Without opining on the likelihood of success, it's an entirely reasonable claim of infringement. Indeed the subject matter of this email demonstrates such confusion -- THANKS is not "trademarked" by anyone, in spite of the attention-getting headline. CITI THANK YOU is a registered trademark of Citigroup. AT&T THANKS is the subject of a pending application by AT&T. If AT&T had merely "used the word in a commercial" and not as a trademark, there would be nothing to object to, and no claim, and this email wouldn't exist. The actual facts are significantly different. That's the problem with suggesting tarring and feathering, and other such actions of a mob mentality. They are based on incorrect facts and a desire to inflame people, rather than to inform them. Unfortunately, information can come too late to save the victims of such an attack (hot tar causes serious and often fatal burns). Thankfully, all that was suggested was a rhetorical tarring and feathering, so no one actually suffered at the hands of an ill-informed, intemperate mob. Hope that is informative. Greg [Caveats: (1) I am a CITI THANK YOU cardholder and use my THANK YOU points regularly on Amazon where they are available as dollars. (2) From around 1999 to 2004, the firm I was with represented Citigroup in trademark matters, though I personally didn't do very much of that work. I have not had any professional relationship with Citigroup since 2004 (3) This should not be construed as legal advice.] On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com as well!
I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1
So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3
-Carlton
[Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.]
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
Thanks for sharing the facts Greg. Chuck From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 6:13 PM To: Carlton Samuels Cc: registration-issues-wg@icann.org; RDS WG Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] "Thanks" is Trademarked! Not sure anyone needs to be tarred and feathered here. But let's get the facts straight. (Perhaps those who don't get the facts straight are the ones who should be tarred & feathered, etc., but that seems rather harsh. I prefer to educate rather than vilify.) Citi did not sue AT&T for "using the word in a commercial." Citi sued AT&T for apparently seeking to brand its new customer loyalty program as AT&T THANKS when Citibank already has a longstanding (since 2004) customer loyalty program branded as CITI THANK YOU, with about 15 million members in the US, and a trademark registered since 2011 for "Promoting the goods and services of others through administration of incentive reward and redemption programs by distributing rewards for credit and debit card use, and for banking and wealth management customer loyalty". And AT&T didn't merely use the THANKS brand, they applied for a trademark registration for AT&T THANKS for "Providing incentive award programs for customers for the purpose of promoting and rewarding loyalty." It seems like an entirely reasonable claim that consumers could be confused between a THANK YOU brand loyalty program and a THANKS brand loyalty program. Without opining on the likelihood of success, it's an entirely reasonable claim of infringement. Indeed the subject matter of this email demonstrates such confusion -- THANKS is not "trademarked" by anyone, in spite of the attention-getting headline. CITI THANK YOU is a registered trademark of Citigroup. AT&T THANKS is the subject of a pending application by AT&T. If AT&T had merely "used the word in a commercial" and not as a trademark, there would be nothing to object to, and no claim, and this email wouldn't exist. The actual facts are significantly different. That's the problem with suggesting tarring and feathering, and other such actions of a mob mentality. They are based on incorrect facts and a desire to inflame people, rather than to inform them. Unfortunately, information can come too late to save the victims of such an attack (hot tar causes serious and often fatal burns). Thankfully, all that was suggested was a rhetorical tarring and feathering, so no one actually suffered at the hands of an ill-informed, intemperate mob. Hope that is informative. Greg [Caveats: (1) I am a CITI THANK YOU cardholder and use my THANK YOU points regularly on Amazon where they are available as dollars. (2) From around 1999 to 2004, the firm I was with represented Citigroup in trademark matters, though I personally didn't do very much of that work. I have not had any professional relationship with Citigroup since 2004 (3) This should not be construed as legal advice.] On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com<mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com>> wrote: ..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com<http://thankyou.com> as well! I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1 So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3 -Carlton [Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.] ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799<tel:876-818-1799> Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
Greg: I hold no brief for Reuters. I looked at the PTO database and saw all you said. And quite frankly if I were an IP lawyer in the trenches and on the clock, I probably would be encouraging these fellas to fight. All that aside, howsoever you slice or dice it, granting exclusive commercial rights to [qualified] "thanks" or "thankyou" seems over the top. Carlton On Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:13 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Not sure anyone needs to be tarred and feathered here. But let's get the facts straight. (Perhaps those who don't get the facts straight are the ones who should be tarred & feathered, etc., but that seems rather harsh. I prefer to educate rather than vilify.)
Citi did not sue AT&T for "using the word in a commercial." Citi sued AT&T for apparently seeking to brand its new customer loyalty program as AT&T THANKS when Citibank already has a longstanding (since 2004) customer loyalty program branded as CITI THANK YOU, with about 15 million members in the US, and a trademark registered since 2011 for "Promoting the goods and services of others through administration of incentive reward and redemption programs by distributing rewards for credit and debit card use, and for banking and wealth management customer *loyalty*". And AT&T didn't merely use the THANKS brand, they applied for a trademark registration for AT&T THANKS for "Providing incentive award programs for customers for the purpose of promoting and rewarding loyalty."
It seems like an entirely reasonable claim that consumers could be confused between a THANK YOU brand loyalty program and a THANKS brand loyalty program. Without opining on the likelihood of success, it's an entirely reasonable claim of infringement. Indeed the subject matter of this email demonstrates such confusion -- THANKS is not "trademarked" by anyone, in spite of the attention-getting headline. CITI THANK YOU is a registered trademark of Citigroup. AT&T THANKS is the subject of a pending application by AT&T.
If AT&T had merely "used the word in a commercial" and not as a trademark, there would be nothing to object to, and no claim, and this email wouldn't exist. The actual facts are significantly different.
That's the problem with suggesting tarring and feathering, and other such actions of a mob mentality. They are based on incorrect facts and a desire to inflame people, rather than to inform them. Unfortunately, information can come too late to save the victims of such an attack (hot tar causes serious and often fatal burns). Thankfully, all that was suggested was a rhetorical tarring and feathering, so no one actually suffered at the hands of an ill-informed, intemperate mob.
Hope that is informative.
Greg
[Caveats: (1) I am a CITI THANK YOU cardholder and use my THANK YOU points regularly on Amazon where they are available as dollars. (2) From around 1999 to 2004, the firm I was with represented Citigroup in trademark matters, though I personally didn't do very much of that work. I have not had any professional relationship with Citigroup since 2004 (3) This should not be construed as legal advice.]
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Carlton Samuels < carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com as well!
I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1
So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3
-Carlton
[Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.]
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
I am with Carleton on this one. Everybody should be allowed to say thanks. not enough of it around.... Stephanie Perrin On 2016-06-10 21:13, Carlton Samuels wrote:
Greg: I hold no brief for Reuters. I looked at the PTO database and saw all you said. And quite frankly if I were an IP lawyer in the trenches and on the clock, I probably would be encouraging these fellas to fight.
All that aside, howsoever you slice or dice it, granting exclusive commercial rights to [qualified] "thanks" or "thankyou" seems over the top.
Carlton
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:13 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote:
Not sure anyone needs to be tarred and feathered here. But let's get the facts straight. (Perhaps those who don't get the facts straight are the ones who should be tarred & feathered, etc., but that seems rather harsh. I prefer to educate rather than vilify.)
Citi did not sue AT&T for "using the word in a commercial." Citi sued AT&T for apparently seeking to brand its new customer loyalty program as AT&T THANKS when Citibank already has a longstanding (since 2004) customer loyalty program branded as CITI THANK YOU, with about 15 million members in the US, and a trademark registered since 2011 for "Promoting the goods and services of others through administration of incentive reward and redemption programs by distributing rewards for credit and debit card use, and for banking and wealth management customer *loyalty*". And AT&T didn't merely use the THANKS brand, they applied for a trademark registration for AT&T THANKS for "Providing incentive award programs for customers for the purpose of promoting and rewarding loyalty."
It seems like an entirely reasonable claim that consumers could be confused between a THANK YOU brand loyalty program and a THANKS brand loyalty program. Without opining on the likelihood of success, it's an entirely reasonable claim of infringement. Indeed the subject matter of this email demonstrates such confusion -- THANKS is not "trademarked" by anyone, in spite of the attention-getting headline. CITI THANK YOU is a registered trademark of Citigroup. AT&T THANKS is the subject of a pending application by AT&T.
If AT&T had merely "used the word in a commercial" and not as a trademark, there would be nothing to object to, and no claim, and this email wouldn't exist. The actual facts are significantly different.
That's the problem with suggesting tarring and feathering, and other such actions of a mob mentality. They are based on incorrect facts and a desire to inflame people, rather than to inform them. Unfortunately, information can come too late to save the victims of such an attack (hot tar causes serious and often fatal burns). Thankfully, all that was suggested was a rhetorical tarring and feathering, so no one actually suffered at the hands of an ill-informed, intemperate mob.
Hope that is informative.
Greg
[Caveats: (1) I am a CITI THANK YOU cardholder and use my THANK YOU points regularly on Amazon where they are available as dollars. (2) From around 1999 to 2004, the firm I was with represented Citigroup in trademark matters, though I personally didn't do very much of that work. I have not had any professional relationship with Citigroup since 2004 (3) This should not be construed as legal advice.]
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com <mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com>> wrote:
..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com <http://thankyou.com> as well!
I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1
So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3
-Carlton
[Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.]
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 <tel:876-818-1799> /Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround/ =============================
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
Nothing in the reported case prevents anyone from saying Thank You or Thanks. Implying otherwise is unhelpful. On Saturday, June 11, 2016, Stephanie Perrin < stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
I am with Carleton on this one. Everybody should be allowed to say thanks. not enough of it around....
Stephanie Perrin
On 2016-06-10 21:13, Carlton Samuels wrote:
Greg: I hold no brief for Reuters. I looked at the PTO database and saw all you said. And quite frankly if I were an IP lawyer in the trenches and on the clock, I probably would be encouraging these fellas to fight.
All that aside, howsoever you slice or dice it, granting exclusive commercial rights to [qualified] "thanks" or "thankyou" seems over the top.
Carlton
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:13 PM Greg Shatan < <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gregshatanipc@gmail.com');> gregshatanipc@gmail.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gregshatanipc@gmail.com');>> wrote:
Not sure anyone needs to be tarred and feathered here. But let's get the facts straight. (Perhaps those who don't get the facts straight are the ones who should be tarred & feathered, etc., but that seems rather harsh. I prefer to educate rather than vilify.)
Citi did not sue AT&T for "using the word in a commercial." Citi sued AT&T for apparently seeking to brand its new customer loyalty program as AT&T THANKS when Citibank already has a longstanding (since 2004) customer loyalty program branded as CITI THANK YOU, with about 15 million members in the US, and a trademark registered since 2011 for "Promoting the goods and services of others through administration of incentive reward and redemption programs by distributing rewards for credit and debit card use, and for banking and wealth management customer *loyalty*". And AT&T didn't merely use the THANKS brand, they applied for a trademark registration for AT&T THANKS for "Providing incentive award programs for customers for the purpose of promoting and rewarding loyalty."
It seems like an entirely reasonable claim that consumers could be confused between a THANK YOU brand loyalty program and a THANKS brand loyalty program. Without opining on the likelihood of success, it's an entirely reasonable claim of infringement. Indeed the subject matter of this email demonstrates such confusion -- THANKS is not "trademarked" by anyone, in spite of the attention-getting headline. CITI THANK YOU is a registered trademark of Citigroup. AT&T THANKS is the subject of a pending application by AT&T.
If AT&T had merely "used the word in a commercial" and not as a trademark, there would be nothing to object to, and no claim, and this email wouldn't exist. The actual facts are significantly different.
That's the problem with suggesting tarring and feathering, and other such actions of a mob mentality. They are based on incorrect facts and a desire to inflame people, rather than to inform them. Unfortunately, information can come too late to save the victims of such an attack (hot tar causes serious and often fatal burns). Thankfully, all that was suggested was a rhetorical tarring and feathering, so no one actually suffered at the hands of an ill-informed, intemperate mob.
Hope that is informative.
Greg
[Caveats: (1) I am a CITI THANK YOU cardholder and use my THANK YOU points regularly on Amazon where they are available as dollars. (2) From around 1999 to 2004, the firm I was with represented Citigroup in trademark matters, though I personally didn't do very much of that work. I have not had any professional relationship with Citigroup since 2004 (3) This should not be construed as legal advice.]
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Carlton Samuels < <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','carlton.samuels@gmail.com');> carlton.samuels@gmail.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','carlton.samuels@gmail.com');>> wrote:
..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com as well!
I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: <http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1> http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1
So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3
-Carlton
[Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.]
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org');> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing listgnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org');>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
I am with Greg on this one. There are dark corners in the world of trademarks and trademark litigation, but this is not one of them. On both a lighter and more substantial side one can check out the Electric Frontier Foundation (EFF) "/Stupid Patent AND Trademark of the Month/" offerings, and their latest offering around "My Health" at https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/05/stupid-patent-and-trademark-month-my-h... Sam L. /On 6/11/2016 2:24 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:// /
/Nothing in the reported case prevents anyone from saying Thank You or Thanks. Implying otherwise is unhelpful.//// // //On Saturday, June 11, 2016, Stephanie Perrin <//stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca <mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca>//> wrote:// /
// //
/I am with Carleton on this one. Everybody should be allowed to say thanks. not enough of it around..../
//
/Stephanie Perrin /
//
/ /
/// /// /On 2016-06-10 21:13, Carlton Samuels wrote:// / //
/Greg: / /I hold no brief for Reuters. I looked at the PTO database and saw all you said. And quite frankly if I were an IP lawyer in the trenches and on the clock, I probably would be encouraging these fellas to fight./ // / / // /All that aside, howsoever you slice or dice it, granting exclusive commercial rights to [qualified] "thanks" or "thankyou" seems over the top./ // / / // /Carlton/ // / / // / //// /// // /On Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:13 PM Greg Shatan <//gregshatanipc@gmail.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gregshatanipc@gmail.com');>//> wrote:// / //
// /Not sure anyone needs to be tarred and feathered here. But let's get the facts straight. (Perhaps those who don't get the facts straight are the ones who should be tarred & feathered, etc., but that seems rather harsh. I prefer to educate rather than vilify.)/ / / /Citi did not sue AT&T for "using the word in a commercial." Citi sued AT&T for apparently seeking to brand its new customer loyalty program as AT&T THANKS when Citibank already has a longstanding (since 2004) customer loyalty program branded as CITI THANK YOU, with about 15 million members in the US, and a trademark registered since 2011 for "//Promoting the goods and services of others through administration of incentive reward and redemption programs by distributing rewards for credit and debit card use, and for banking and wealth management customer *loyalty*//". And AT&T didn't merely use the THANKS brand, they applied for a trademark registration for AT&T THANKS for "//Providing incentive award programs for customers for the purpose of promoting and rewarding loyalty.//" / / / /It seems like an entirely reasonable claim that consumers could be confused between a THANK YOU brand loyalty program and a THANKS brand loyalty program. Without opining on the likelihood of success, it's an entirely reasonable claim of infringement. Indeed the subject matter of this email demonstrates such confusion -- THANKS is not "trademarked" by anyone, in spite of the attention-getting headline. CITI THANK YOU is a registered trademark of Citigroup. AT&T THANKS is the subject of a pending application by AT&T./ / / /If AT&T had merely "used the word in a commercial" and not as a trademark, there would be nothing to object to, and no claim, and this email wouldn't exist. The actual facts are significantly different. / / / /That's the problem with suggesting tarring and feathering, and other such actions of a mob mentality. They are based on incorrect facts and a desire to inflame people, rather than to inform them. Unfortunately, information can come too late to save the victims of such an attack (hot tar causes serious and often fatal burns). Thankfully, all that was suggested was a rhetorical tarring and feathering, so no one actually suffered at the hands of an ill-informed, intemperate mob./ / / /Hope that is informative./ / / /Greg/ / / /[Caveats: (1) I am a CITI THANK YOU cardholder and use my THANK YOU points regularly on Amazon where they are available as dollars. (2) From around 1999 to 2004, the firm I was with represented Citigroup in trademark matters, though I personally didn't do very much of that work. I have not had any professional relationship with Citigroup since 2004 (3) This should not be construed as legal advice.] / // / / // /On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Carlton Samuels //<carlton.samuels@gmail.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','carlton.samuels@gmail.com');>>//wrote:// / // // //
// // /..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns //thankyou.com <http://thankyou.com>//as well! / // / / // /I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: //http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1/ // / / // /So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby?/ // / / // /http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3// / // / / // /-Carlton/ // / / // /[Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.]/ // / / // /==============================// / // // /Carlton A Samuels// //Mobile: //876-818-1799 <tel:876-818-1799>// ////Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround/ =============================
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org');> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org');> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-- ------------------------------------------------ "It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured in an unjust state" -Confucius 邦有道，贫且贱焉，耻也。邦无道，富且贵焉，耻也 ------------------------------------------------ Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar) Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3 email: Lanfran@Yorku.ca Skype: slanfranco blog: http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852
I personally have enjoyed the discussion on this but I would like to suggest that it is not contributing to our actions at hand and I recommend that we move on. To the extent that any issues in this case might be helpful in our soon to begin deliberations on possible requirements, that will be the time to bring them up. I am not suggesting that they will be relevant or not but we will have the opportunity to discuss that at the appropriate time. I think all of us know that we will have at least two general points of view that will be at odds when we start deliberating. If either side was as clear cut as some may think, I believe the Whois debate would have been settled a long time ago. The fact is that it is still going on and that is why the WG exists. Everyone will be encouraged to share their points of view as they relate to various areas of deliberation as long as it is done constructively and respectfully. Then we will need to diligently work together in spite of our differences to find ways to bridge our differences and come up with solutions that most if not all of us can support. This will be a big test of our willingness and commitment to make the multi-stakeholder model work for the good of the overall community and I will make every effort to help us pass that test. Finally, let me say that I chose this point to intervene only because it was the most recent message in this thread. My comments are not directed at Sam as the most recent contributor or Carlton as the initiator or anyone who commented in between. They are intended for all of us as a team. Have a good weekend. Chuck From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Sam Lanfranco Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2016 9:37 AM To: Greg Shatan; Stephanie Perrin Cc: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] "Thanks" is Trademarked! I am with Greg on this one. There are dark corners in the world of trademarks and trademark litigation, but this is not one of them. On both a lighter and more substantial side one can check out the Electric Frontier Foundation (EFF) "Stupid Patent AND Trademark of the Month" offerings, and their latest offering around "My Health" at https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/05/stupid-patent-and-trademark-month-my-h... Sam L. On 6/11/2016 2:24 AM, Greg Shatan wrote: Nothing in the reported case prevents anyone from saying Thank You or Thanks. Implying otherwise is unhelpful. On Saturday, June 11, 2016, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote: I am with Carleton on this one. Everybody should be allowed to say thanks. not enough of it around.... Stephanie Perrin On 2016-06-10 21:13, Carlton Samuels wrote: Greg: I hold no brief for Reuters. I looked at the PTO database and saw all you said. And quite frankly if I were an IP lawyer in the trenches and on the clock, I probably would be encouraging these fellas to fight. All that aside, howsoever you slice or dice it, granting exclusive commercial rights to [qualified] "thanks" or "thankyou" seems over the top. Carlton On Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:13 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote: Not sure anyone needs to be tarred and feathered here. But let's get the facts straight. (Perhaps those who don't get the facts straight are the ones who should be tarred & feathered, etc., but that seems rather harsh. I prefer to educate rather than vilify.) Citi did not sue AT&T for "using the word in a commercial." Citi sued AT&T for apparently seeking to brand its new customer loyalty program as AT&T THANKS when Citibank already has a longstanding (since 2004) customer loyalty program branded as CITI THANK YOU, with about 15 million members in the US, and a trademark registered since 2011 for "Promoting the goods and services of others through administration of incentive reward and redemption programs by distributing rewards for credit and debit card use, and for banking and wealth management customer loyalty". And AT&T didn't merely use the THANKS brand, they applied for a trademark registration for AT&T THANKS for "Providing incentive award programs for customers for the purpose of promoting and rewarding loyalty." It seems like an entirely reasonable claim that consumers could be confused between a THANK YOU brand loyalty program and a THANKS brand loyalty program. Without opining on the likelihood of success, it's an entirely reasonable claim of infringement. Indeed the subject matter of this email demonstrates such confusion -- THANKS is not "trademarked" by anyone, in spite of the attention-getting headline. CITI THANK YOU is a registered trademark of Citigroup. AT&T THANKS is the subject of a pending application by AT&T. If AT&T had merely "used the word in a commercial" and not as a trademark, there would be nothing to object to, and no claim, and this email wouldn't exist. The actual facts are significantly different. That's the problem with suggesting tarring and feathering, and other such actions of a mob mentality. They are based on incorrect facts and a desire to inflame people, rather than to inform them. Unfortunately, information can come too late to save the victims of such an attack (hot tar causes serious and often fatal burns). Thankfully, all that was suggested was a rhetorical tarring and feathering, so no one actually suffered at the hands of an ill-informed, intemperate mob. Hope that is informative. Greg [Caveats: (1) I am a CITI THANK YOU cardholder and use my THANK YOU points regularly on Amazon where they are available as dollars. (2) From around 1999 to 2004, the firm I was with represented Citigroup in trademark matters, though I personally didn't do very much of that work. I have not had any professional relationship with Citigroup since 2004 (3) This should not be construed as legal advice.] On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','carlton.samuels@gmail.com');>> wrote: ..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com<http://thankyou.com> as well! I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1 So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3 -Carlton [Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.] ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799<tel:876-818-1799> Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org');> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org');> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg -- ------------------------------------------------ "It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured in an unjust state" -Confucius 邦有道，贫且贱焉，耻也。邦无道，富且贵焉，耻也 ------------------------------------------------ Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar) Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3 email: Lanfran@Yorku.ca<mailto:Lanfran@Yorku.ca> Skype: slanfranco blog: http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852
+1 @Chuck. Indeed, very intersting debate but not useful at that moment; I agree. Let's move from here, please. Cheers ! -Olévié- 2016-06-11 14:05 GMT+00:00 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com>:
I personally have enjoyed the discussion on this but I would like to suggest that it is not contributing to our actions at hand and I recommend that we move on. To the extent that any issues in this case might be helpful in our soon to begin deliberations on possible requirements, that will be the time to bring them up. I am not suggesting that they will be relevant or not but we will have the opportunity to discuss that at the appropriate time.
I think all of us know that we will have at least two general points of view that will be at odds when we start deliberating. If either side was as clear cut as some may think, I believe the Whois debate would have been settled a long time ago. The fact is that it is still going on and that is why the WG exists.
Everyone will be encouraged to share their points of view as they relate to various areas of deliberation as long as it is done constructively and respectfully. Then we will need to diligently work together in spite of our differences to find ways to bridge our differences and come up with solutions that most if not all of us can support. This will be a big test of our willingness and commitment to make the multi-stakeholder model work for the good of the overall community and I will make every effort to help us pass that test.
Finally, let me say that I chose this point to intervene only because it was the most recent message in this thread. My comments are not directed at Sam as the most recent contributor or Carlton as the initiator or anyone who commented in between. They are intended for all of us as a team.
Have a good weekend.
Chuck
*From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Sam Lanfranco *Sent:* Saturday, June 11, 2016 9:37 AM *To:* Greg Shatan; Stephanie Perrin *Cc:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] "Thanks" is Trademarked!
I am with Greg on this one. There are dark corners in the world of trademarks and trademark litigation, but this is not one of them.
On both a lighter and more substantial side one can check out the Electric Frontier Foundation (EFF) "*Stupid Patent AND Trademark of the Month*" offerings,
and their latest offering around "My Health" at https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/05/stupid-patent-and-trademark-month-my-h...
Sam L.
*On 6/11/2016 2:24 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:*
*Nothing in the reported case prevents anyone from saying Thank You or Thanks. Implying otherwise is unhelpful. On Saturday, June 11, 2016, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote:*
*I am with Carleton on this one. Everybody should be allowed to say thanks. not enough of it around....*
*Stephanie Perrin*
*On 2016-06-10 21:13, Carlton Samuels wrote:*
*Greg: *
*I hold no brief for Reuters. I looked at the PTO database and saw all you said. And quite frankly if I were an IP lawyer in the trenches and on the clock, I probably would be encouraging these fellas to fight.*
*All that aside, howsoever you slice or dice it, granting exclusive commercial rights to [qualified] "thanks" or "thankyou" seems over the top.*
*Carlton*
*On Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:13 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote:*
*Not sure anyone needs to be tarred and feathered here. But let's get the facts straight. (Perhaps those who don't get the facts straight are the ones who should be tarred & feathered, etc., but that seems rather harsh. I prefer to educate rather than vilify.)*
*Citi did not sue AT&T for "using the word in a commercial." Citi sued AT&T for apparently seeking to brand its new customer loyalty program as AT&T THANKS when Citibank already has a longstanding (since 2004) customer loyalty program branded as CITI THANK YOU, with about 15 million members in the US, and a trademark registered since 2011 for "**Promoting the goods and services of others through administration of incentive reward and redemption programs by distributing rewards for credit and debit card use, and for banking and wealth management customer loyalty**". And AT&T didn't merely use the THANKS brand, they applied for a trademark registration for AT&T THANKS for "Providing incentive award programs for customers for the purpose of promoting and rewarding loyalty." *
*It seems like an entirely reasonable claim that consumers could be confused between a THANK YOU brand loyalty program and a THANKS brand loyalty program. Without opining on the likelihood of success, it's an entirely reasonable claim of infringement. Indeed the subject matter of this email demonstrates such confusion -- THANKS is not "trademarked" by anyone, in spite of the attention-getting headline. CITI THANK YOU is a registered trademark of Citigroup. AT&T THANKS is the subject of a pending application by AT&T.*
*If AT&T had merely "used the word in a commercial" and not as a trademark, there would be nothing to object to, and no claim, and this email wouldn't exist. The actual facts are significantly different. *
*That's the problem with suggesting tarring and feathering, and other such actions of a mob mentality. They are based on incorrect facts and a desire to inflame people, rather than to inform them. Unfortunately, information can come too late to save the victims of such an attack (hot tar causes serious and often fatal burns). Thankfully, all that was suggested was a rhetorical tarring and feathering, so no one actually suffered at the hands of an ill-informed, intemperate mob.*
*Hope that is informative.*
*Greg*
*[Caveats: (1) I am a CITI THANK YOU cardholder and use my THANK YOU points regularly on Amazon where they are available as dollars. (2) From around 1999 to 2004, the firm I was with represented Citigroup in trademark matters, though I personally didn't do very much of that work. I have not had any professional relationship with Citigroup since 2004 (3) This should not be construed as legal advice.] *
*On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:*
*..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com <http://thankyou.com> as well! *
*I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1 <http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1>*
*So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby?*
*http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3 <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3>*
*-Carlton*
*[Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.]*
*==============================*
*Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 <876-818-1799> **Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
--
------------------------------------------------
"It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured
in an unjust state" -Confucius
邦有道，贫且贱焉，耻也。邦无道，富且贵焉，耻也
------------------------------------------------
Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar)
Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3
email: Lanfran@Yorku.ca Skype: slanfranco
blog: http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com
Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-- *Olévié Ayaovi Agbenyo KOUAMI* *Directeur-Adjoint de O and K IT SOLUTIONS sarl **Editeur de logiciels de gestion (PGI/ERP) S.I.G.E. (http://www.oandkit.com <http://www.oandkit.com>)* *Président/CEO de l'INTIC4DEV (Institut des TIC pour le développement) http://www.intic4dev.org <http://www.intic4dev.org> * *Eminent National Expert for the World Summit Award (http://www.wsis-award.org <http://www.wsis-award.org>) * *Secrétaire Général de l'ESTETIC - Association Togolaise des professionnels des TIC (http://www.estetic.tg <http://www.estetic.tg>)* *ICANN-GNSO-NCSG-NPOC Communications Committee Chair (http://www.npoc.org/ <http://www.npoc.org/>)**ICANN - Fellow & Alumni (http://www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org>) - Membre de Internet Society (http://www.isoc.org <http://www.isoc.org>) * *Membre fondateur du RIK-Togo (Réseau Interprofessionnel du Karité au Togo) *(http://www.globalshea.com) *Skype : olevie1 FaceBook : @olivier.kouami.3 Twitter : #oleviek Lomé – Togo*
As I discovered during the sunrise period of one of the new gTLD's "internet" is somehow trademarked... -------- Original Message -------- On Jun 11, 2016, 12:00 AM, Stephanie Perrin wrote: I am with Carleton on this one. Everybody should be allowed to say thanks. not enough of it around.... Stephanie Perrin On 2016-06-10 21:13, Carlton Samuels wrote: Greg: I hold no brief for Reuters. I looked at the PTO database and saw all you said. And quite frankly if I were an IP lawyer in the trenches and on the clock, I probably would be encouraging these fellas to fight. All that aside, howsoever you slice or dice it, granting exclusive commercial rights to [qualified] "thanks" or "thankyou" seems over the top. Carlton On Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:13 PM Greg Shatan < [](mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com) gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote: Not sure anyone needs to be tarred and feathered here. But let's get the facts straight. (Perhaps those who don't get the facts straight are the ones who should be tarred & feathered, etc., but that seems rather harsh. I prefer to educate rather than vilify.) Citi did not sue AT&T for "using the word in a commercial." Citi sued AT&T for apparently seeking to brand its new customer loyalty program as AT&T THANKS when Citibank already has a longstanding (since 2004) customer loyalty program branded as CITI THANK YOU, with about 15 million members in the US, and a trademark registered since 2011 for " Promoting the goods and services of others through administration of incentive reward and redemption programs by distributing rewards for credit and debit card use, and for banking and wealth management customer loyalty". And AT&T didn't merely use the THANKS brand, they applied for a trademark registration for AT&T THANKS for " Providing incentive award programs for customers for the purpose of promoting and rewarding loyalty." It seems like an entirely reasonable claim that consumers could be confused between a THANK YOU brand loyalty program and a THANKS brand loyalty program. Without opining on the likelihood of success, it's an entirely reasonable claim of infringement. Indeed the subject matter of this email demonstrates such confusion -- THANKS is not "trademarked" by anyone, in spite of the attention-getting headline. CITI THANK YOU is a registered trademark of Citigroup. AT&T THANKS is the subject of a pending application by AT&T. If AT&T had merely "used the word in a commercial" and not as a trademark, there would be nothing to object to, and no claim, and this email wouldn't exist. The actual facts are significantly different. That's the problem with suggesting tarring and feathering, and other such actions of a mob mentality. They are based on incorrect facts and a desire to inflame people, rather than to inform them. Unfortunately, information can come too late to save the victims of such an attack (hot tar causes serious and often fatal burns). Thankfully, all that was suggested was a rhetorical tarring and feathering, so no one actually suffered at the hands of an ill-informed, intemperate mob. Hope that is informative. Greg [Caveats: (1) I am a CITI THANK YOU cardholder and use my THANK YOU points regularly on Amazon where they are available as dollars. (2) From around 1999 to 2004, the firm I was with represented Citigroup in trademark matters, though I personally didn't do very much of that work. I have not had any professional relationship with Citigroup since 2004 (3) This should not be construed as legal advice.] On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Carlton Samuels <[](mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com)carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote: ..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com as well! I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: [](http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1) http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1 So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3 -Carlton [Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.] ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: [876-818-1799](tel:876-818-1799) Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
Hi, I'm struggling and failing to understand what this has to do with the RDS. Can you explain? Thanks, A On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 02:15:39PM -0500, Carlton Samuels wrote:
..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com as well!
I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1
So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3
-Carlton
[Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.]
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
Andrew, I'm not quite sure but it might be an attempt to spin the facts of a case (just a filed complaint not a decidion of a court) in order to insinuate an argument that this case is silly thus all trademark rights are silly and thus the rights of trademark owners are silly and thus trademark owners don't deserve access to RDS data. Or it could just be off-topic. On Saturday, June 11, 2016, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
Hi,
I'm struggling and failing to understand what this has to do with the RDS. Can you explain?
Thanks,
A
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 02:15:39PM -0500, Carlton Samuels wrote:
..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com as well!
I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1
So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3
-Carlton
[Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.]
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org <javascript:;> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com <javascript:;> _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org <javascript:;> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
Greg, I hope no one is insinuating that. However, trademark holders only should have a right to access the data if trademark law provides for such a right. If no such right to access non-public customer data exists in the real world, we should not grant it here either. If such a right exists on the other hand, we should consider it for access to the new database as well, with all the strings and requirements attached of course. So if a trademark holder needs a court order to access non-public private information (for example to find out who is behind an ebay account), this should apply to RDS as well. Sorry for the off-topic. Best, Volker Am 11.06.2016 um 08:24 schrieb Greg Shatan:
Andrew,
I'm not quite sure but it might be an attempt to spin the facts of a case (just a filed complaint not a decidion of a court) in order to insinuate an argument that this case is silly thus all trademark rights are silly and thus the rights of trademark owners are silly and thus trademark owners don't deserve access to RDS data.
Or it could just be off-topic.
On Saturday, June 11, 2016, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com <mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>> wrote:
Hi,
I'm struggling and failing to understand what this has to do with the RDS. Can you explain?
Thanks,
A
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 02:15:39PM -0500, Carlton Samuels wrote: > ..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns > thankyou.com <http://thankyou.com> as well! > > I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" > there, dead and alive. See: > http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1 > > So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put > in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every > passerby? > > http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3 > > -Carlton > > [Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.] > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > =============================
> _______________________________________________ > gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list > gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org <javascript:;> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com <javascript:;> _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org <javascript:;> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
All - Please note that I requested that we move on from this thread. I would appreciate it if there are no further messages on this topic at this time. Chuck From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker Greimann Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 4:10 AM To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] "Thanks" is Trademarked! Greg, I hope no one is insinuating that. However, trademark holders only should have a right to access the data if trademark law provides for such a right. If no such right to access non-public customer data exists in the real world, we should not grant it here either. If such a right exists on the other hand, we should consider it for access to the new database as well, with all the strings and requirements attached of course. So if a trademark holder needs a court order to access non-public private information (for example to find out who is behind an ebay account), this should apply to RDS as well. Sorry for the off-topic. Best, Volker Am 11.06.2016 um 08:24 schrieb Greg Shatan: Andrew, I'm not quite sure but it might be an attempt to spin the facts of a case (just a filed complaint not a decidion of a court) in order to insinuate an argument that this case is silly thus all trademark rights are silly and thus the rights of trademark owners are silly and thus trademark owners don't deserve access to RDS data. Or it could just be off-topic. On Saturday, June 11, 2016, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com<mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>> wrote: Hi, I'm struggling and failing to understand what this has to do with the RDS. Can you explain? Thanks, A On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 02:15:39PM -0500, Carlton Samuels wrote:
..and Citi sues AT&T for using the word in a commercial! It also owns thankyou.com<http://thankyou.com> as well!
I checked the USPTO database and it was a revelation; lots of "thankyou" there, dead and alive. See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4803:ku1j42.1.1
So I ask you, who're the halfwits that need to be tarred, feathered and put in stock in the village square for a quick kick in the butt from every passerby?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-at-t-citigroup-lawsuit-idUSKCN0YW1K3
-Carlton
[Disclosure: I'm partial to AT&T on account they paid for graduate school.]
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<javascript:;> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com<javascript:;> _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<javascript:;> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
participants (9)
-
Andrew Sullivan -
Carlton Samuels -
Gomes, Chuck -
Greg Shatan -
Olévié Kouami -
Sam Lanfranco -
Stephanie Perrin -
TXVB -
Volker Greimann