>Unlike the situation with respect to trademark infringement, whether or not a
>domain is "commercial" is irrelevant on issues of dilution. I could put up a
>site full of quotations from Hamlet on the domain name cocacola.org and
>get my butt sued and I'd lose. Secondly, what is filed is a Complaint For
>Declaratory Judgment, not involving an injunction, and when you file that
>NSI leaves the domain name as it was until the case is done. (It files the
>registration certificate for the domain name into the Federal Court, and
>then the winning party seeks an order from the Court to NSI to do whatever
>the result was, and I expect that NSI will obey the order.) Point about this
>whole thing is, the NSI policy leaves it to the often penniless domain name
>holder the task of coming up with the bucks -- i.e., just by writing a letter
>to NSI the owner of the registered mark gets a shortcut or even an instant
>winner, if the domain name holder just can't raise the bucks to file suit,
>and
>without regard to any merits of the case, i.e., even in the complete absence
>of even the slightest likelihood of confusion.
The dilution statute itself requires commercial use (regardless of whether
the domain itself is labeled as "commercial." I'm certain that if a .org
sold things, it would qualify under dilution. I do not believe, under the
statute as written, that you should lose your domain name even if it was
cocacola.org.
As to the motion, why not file a direct injunction against NSI itself in
state court if you happen to be in Virginia? I think that would be much
cheaper for the domain name holder. Do you think that would be a bad idea?
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
