Thanks for advocating for the devil 3:-) and ending this work week on a humorous note, George! Regards, Steve On 9/23/16, 4:54 PM, "gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org on behalf of George Kirikos" <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org on behalf of icann@leap.com> wrote:
To play Devil's Advocate, swatch.watch has potential uses other than wristwatches.... e.g. ICANNwatch.org isn't a site where "watch" isn't referring to timekeeping devices.
Perhaps it could be used by Norway's "Slow Television" where 12 hours of a TV program might be devoted to viewing various swatch fabrics.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_television
Have a nice weekend, everyone!
Sincerely,
George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Steve Levy <slevy@accentlawgroup.com> wrote:
Thanks for your comment, Paul. If a domain consists of a generic term with no other content that implicates the brand, in most cases I would agree that the registry can sell it as it sees fit. However, if other terms clearly implicate the brand then I¹d say the registry is simply gouging. For example, swatch.xyz has the potential to be used by someone in the fabric business and any future improper use (ex. hosting a website featuring Timex watches) could be dealt with through the UDRP. However, if the domain is swatch.watch I don¹t see how a registry could claim that this implicates anything other than the wristwatch trademark. As such, gouge pricing would be improper as a transparent attempt to profit from the brand and the debate of whether this is a preventative or curative right becomes academic.
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg