>A few isolated cases do not change the facts that the number of trademark >disputes based on third and lower level domains is dwarfed by those >associated with SLDs, and that no trademark holders' group has yet proposed >that lower level domains be subject to dispute resolution procedures. You could basically say the same thing regarding ANY domain name disputes when you hold them up against the numbers of domain names that are registered and/or in use. The tiny fraction of disputes does not warrant the attention it's been getting. ICANN should stick to the technical administration and let the courts and legislatures create new laws. > >Most trademark holders (Viacom being the proverbial 'exception that proves >the rule') would not consider trademark.sld.com worth their time. In most >cases, they would never know about its existence - there are undoubtedly >still hundreds of machines named 'picard' that remain undiscovered by >Viacom. Many more trademark holders would consider a com/net/org SLD >registration matching their trademark actionable. And that is part of the problem, isn't it? Registration of a domain name that matches a trademark is not and should not, in itself, be actionable.
