At 03:40 PM 6/30/99 -0400, you wrote: >>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 30 15:40:26 1999 >Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Received: from drx.rivalworks.com (drx.rivalworks.com [209.6.170.10]) > by ns1.vrx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEC0FF01B > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 30 Jun 1999 15:40:25 -0400 (EDT) >Received: from beast (beast.rivalworks.com [209.6.170.11]) > by drx.rivalworks.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA18466; > Wed, 30 Jun 1999 15:34:52 -0400 >From: "Rob Raisch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "William X. Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: [IFWP] Re: Speculation [Was Re: Anti-cybersquatting Consumer >ProtectionAct] >Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 15:34:52 -0400 >Message-ID: <002b01bec32f$9fcddaa0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 >Importance: Normal >In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 > >If the burden of protecting a trade, service, or other valuable mark has >always been placed squarely in the hands of the party that owns the mark and >must protect it to maintain its value, why are we even contemplating >creating new methods of protection? >-- >Rob Raisch CTO - RivalWorks, Inc. <http://www.rivalworks.com> >Who do you want to play today? > > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] "They were of a mind to govern us and we were of a mind to govern ourselves."
