Hello Kim

The grounds of the appeal made known to Melb IT and auDA, included Common
Law Mark (Exact match to the Trading Name of the Pty Ltd Company that
naturally enjoys protection against false, deceptive conduct or use of
matching or similar names anywhere in Australia).

The grounds expressed also include evidence of previous release of domains
previously protected by the same "generic" restriction, and extensive
argument and evidence that the particular word cannot be correctly deemed
'generic' by definition in accordance with the criteria used in the Policy
used or in general terms. It included expert testimony and the evidence was
strong and compelling according to a third party IP Lawyer whose independent
opinion was sought.

It would also seem that the 'new system' does not yet have a dispute
resolution policy stated and therefore offers no approach??

Do you have any suggestions of alternative recourse right now, when there
appears to be no stated policy?

Policy under the 'new system', whilst important and of value not only to the
DNS system in Australia but also to all registrants of domains, cannot
extinguish the antecedent rights of Common Law Mark or pending Trademark.


Phil Wright


-----Original Message-----
From: Kim Davies [mailto:kim§centr.org]
Sent: Friday, 5 July 2002 3:56 PM
To: dns§lists.auda.org.au
Subject: RE: [DNS] Very Concerned RE Trademark and IP issues with
'Generic Auctions'


At 14:44 5/07/2002 +1000, you wrote:
>The domain that was considered generic (and was restricted by Melb IT) was

I'm actually curious what basis you believe you have any sort of pre-emptive
right over this domain name in the new system, or why you believe you had
any
superior right to the domain name over the previously established policy?
Or do you just believe you were eligible under the old policy (i.e. the word
before .com.au was not generic) and that it was being applied incorrectly?

kim
speaking for myself as always.