[Ir-l] "Sucks" domain name must be awarded to company, WIPO panel says

Tue Nov 27 02:02:13 GMT 2001

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 24 Nov 2001, Paul Mobbs wrote:

> ----------  Forwarded Message  ----------
> From: Declan McCullagh <declan at well.com>
> Subject: FC: "Sucks" domain name must be awarded to company, WIPO panel says
> 
> This is an amazingly awful decision. It says that because non-English
> speakers might be confused by the "sucks" suffix on
> VIVENDIUNIVERSALSUCKS.COM, the domain name must be turned over to the
> company it criticizes:

The whole business of governments (as with uk.) and quasi-government
organisations (like ICANN) claiming ownership of top level domains is
essentially fraudulent.  DNS is just a distributed database, and the
names are only in it to make IP addresses more memorable/reachable.  If
more people did like what New.net did and set up there own DNS root
servers this kind of abuse would be impossible.  Because we buy in to
the misunderstanding that the government "owns" uk. we get fobbed of
with co.uk. and org.uk. sub-delegations while the government just gives
itself any second level domain it likes - police.uk. sch.uk. nhs.uk.
gov.uk. parliament.uk. and any others they feel like using.  For the
record, when I can afford to get a machine co-located on the Internet
I'll be happy to run a root and TLD nameserver, one that respected the
rights of first-claimants, and ignored legal fictions like trademarks
trumping DNS.  If a few other people were willing to come in on it would
be possible to have something as technically reliable as
root-servers.net. are currently.  Who knows? - It might even catch on.

Bill.

- -- 
W. Palfreman. 		http://www.palfreman.com/william/
Tel: 0771 355 0354	PGP ftp://ftp.palfreman.com/pub/wfpkey.asc
			PGP id: 0x26C72581

On Sat, 24 Nov 2001, Paul Mobbs wrote:

> 
> 
> ----------  Forwarded Message  ----------
> Subject: FC: "Sucks" domain name must be awarded to company, WIPO panel says
> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 02:14:58 -0500
> From: Declan McCullagh <declan at well.com>
> To: politech at politechbot.com
> Cc: jdsallen at ix.netcom.com, rbianchi at internet.siscotel.com
> 
> 
> This is an amazingly awful decision. It says that because non-English
> speakers might be confused by the "sucks" suffix on
> VIVENDIUNIVERSALSUCKS.COM, the domain name must be turned over to the
> company it criticizes:
> 
> http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/2001/d2001-1121.html
> 
> >the Panel has found that non-English speaking Internet users would be
> >likely to attach no significance to the appended word 'sucks' and would
> >therefore regard the disputed domain name as conveying an association with
> >the Complainant
> 
> The WIPO panel goes so far as to insist that because the band Primus owns
> the domain name primussucks.com (named after their 1990 album "Suck on
> This"), prospective visitors to vivendi.com might get confused about who's
>  who.
> 
> -Declan
> 
> ---
> 
> From: "j d sallen" <jdsallen at ix.netcom.com>
> To: "Declan McCullagh" <declan at well.com>
> Subject: VIVENDIUNIVERSALSUCKS.COM UDRP decision
> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 12:30:43 -0500
> 
> Yesterday I received the VIVENDIUNIVERSALSUCKS.COM UDRP decision which
> comes down in favor of pirating this domain name for the company (aka,
> ordering a transfer). Although, as its (for now) owner, it is my speech
> rights that are being squashed, I got a good laugh out of the decision.
> Have they no shame.
> 
> There is a darkly comic component to the VIVENDI decision. The decision of
> panelists Sir Ian Barker and Alan Limbury  (now a sporting a combined
> record of 72-10 in favor of complainants, when acting a single panelists)
> references the rock group Primus. Indeed, they go further with specific
> mention of Les Claypool, Primus's front-man. Are we supposed to believe
> that these two "learned" Englishmen are followers of, or familiar with,
> this particularly quirky rock band? In light of the fact that the
> complainants in this case are multi-national rock music moguls (who made no
> mention of Primus or any other group in their complaint, the only
> communication sanctioned by the UDRP rules), this is one citing that
> clearly fails the sniff test.
> 
> I recall reading a widely-published rebuttal of Michael Geists's study on
> UDRP decisions and process, by an IP lawyer I think, arguing that any
> Panelists whose decisions were consistently pro-complainant or betrayed an
> agenda would fast be weeded out. Panelists like Ian Barker are perfect
> cases in point showing the fallacy of that premise. Or perhaps Roberto
> Bianchi, whose record is a "perfect" 43-0, and counting, in favor of
> complainants (among these was the CORINTHIANS.COM ruling, as sole
> panelist). Such intellectually bankrupt decisions are even more problematic
> than they first appear because poor decisions serve as precedents that
> enable more and poorer rulings. The result is a UDRP system that has sent
> fairness into a death-spiral.
> 
> Warm regards,
> 
> J D Sallen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------
> 
> "We are not for names, nor men, nor titles of Government, nor are we for
> this party nor against the other but we are for justice and mercy and
> truth and peace and true freedom, that these may be exalted in our nation,
> and that goodness, righteousness, meekness, temperance, peace and unity
> with God, and with one another, that these things may abound."
> (Edward Burroughs, 1659 - from 'Quaker Faith and Practice')
> 
> 
> Paul Mobbs, Mobbs' Environmental Investigations,
> 3 Grosvenor Road, Banbury OX16 5HN, England
> tel./fax (+44/0)1295 261864
> 
> email - mobbsey at gn.apc.org
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> gpg: Signature made Sat 24 Nov 2001 05:21:09 PM GMT using DSA key ID CD398F1D
> gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAjwC9C0ACgkQlEOQDkvPqLbpzACdGBIC9UMiS9nOQutYMcGyIVpi
1usAnipWH+QsKa6fofw3FntcA20uQo2w
=5Q07
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----