ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Forza, Barca! | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 15 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: Forza, Barca!
    by Anonymous on Wednesday April 03 2002, @12:12PM (#5687)
    The registrants filed their notice of appeal with the district court of March 22, 2002 (added to the docket by the court on March 25, 2002), the first step in appealing the decision to the 4th Circuit. Check out the UDRP-Court Challenge Database on UDRPlaw.net, http://www.udrplaw.net/UDRPappeals.htm, to track the case, as well as the site's helpful list of City Name decisions, located at: http://www.udrplaw.net/CityNamesresources.htm.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Forza, Barca!
    by Anonymous on Wednesday April 03 2002, @12:38PM (#5689)
    The judge is on crack. The Barcelona city council is using the pro government/corporate bias that exists in the domain dispute resolution process to wrest barcelona.com for its lawful registrant.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Forza, Barca!
    by Anonymous on Thursday April 04 2002, @02:41AM (#5696)
    The registrants deserve their name back. I hope they win on appeal.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Forza, Barca!
    by Anonymous on Thursday April 04 2002, @04:07AM (#5698)
    If there is a contest for the worse judge of the year, this judge has got my vote.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: Forza, Barca!
      by Anonymous on Friday April 05 2002, @07:48AM (#5722)
      I heard from someone who attended the hearing that this judge insisted to a lawyer in another case that Congress created ICANN. . . Good grief.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Forza, Barca!
    by dtobias (dan@tobias.name) on Thursday April 04 2002, @04:46AM (#5699)
    User #2967 Info | http://domains.dan.info/
    I wonder if the lawyer for barcelona.com did a good job of presenting their side? Given some of the dubious things the judge said, I question that. For one thing, a (long) list of city-named sites that are not created or endorsed by the city governments should have been brought up. (For instance, shreveport.net, a site I was involved with in the past that has information about Shreveport, Louisiana, but is not the official city government site; nor is that at shreveport.com, another independent city-info site; the official site is where it belongs at ci.shreveport.la.us.)

    The many UDRP decisions favoring the respondent in geographical-name cases (barcelona.com was the rare, aberrant exception) should also have been brought up forcefully.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: Forza, Barca!
      by Anonymous on Thursday April 04 2002, @06:08AM (#5700)
      True true. I hope the lawyer for the registrants takes a look at that list of city name cases very closely, as well as the WIPO 1 and WIPO 2 Reports that have not granted special protection to cities and municipalities under the UDRP. The UDRP decision should not have resulted the way it did, based on those reports. The City was lucky it had a favorable Chilean panelist who sided with the City rather than the registrants.

      Given the long list of city names taken by registrants not affiliated with the city, it should help the registrants in their case. Do a search on Namedroppers for "London," "Paris," "Rome," etc and you find thousands of domain names.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: Give unto Rome that which is Rome's
      by Anonymous on Thursday April 04 2002, @10:53AM (#5703)
      The City should address itself with Barcelona.es and not .com!
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: Forza, Barca!
      by mjrippon on Thursday April 04 2002, @11:16PM (#5708)
      User #2960 Info

      The judgment in this case focussed on Spanish law to determine whether the City Council enjoyed trademark rights to the "Barcelona". Spanish law differs on this to US/UK law, and it was refreshing to see a US court interprete the case accordingly. If the City Council hadn't established trademark rights, their case would have been doomed.

      BTW forza is Italian. Perhaps David meant "Vamos Barca"?

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re: Forza, Barca!
        by Anonymous on Friday April 05 2002, @08:45AM (#5723)
        how 'bout we exchange the word "refreshing" with "treason"
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re: Forza, Barca!
        by Anonymous on Friday July 05 2002, @01:18AM (#7649)
        The correct phrase is "Força Barça" - in Catalan, not Spanish. (In Spanish it would be "fuerza" but it isn't used in the same way).
        And yes, I agree with other posts, the Worst Judge of the Year Award goes to this man.
        Ricard Giner
        www.barcelona-art.com
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: EFF, Where are you?
    by Anonymous on Thursday April 04 2002, @04:10PM (#5706)
    This is a perfect case for the EFF. They step up to defend real cybersquatters, why not step up to defend people who made legitimate use of domain name. That would make too much sense.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: EFF, Where are you?
      by Anonymous on Friday April 05 2002, @02:41AM (#5709)
      Right on Anon, the EFF supports litigation for more infamous individuals all the time, why shouldn't they provide some support to the registrants who lost these two awful decisions. Instead of trying to get the ACPA repealed (which is a real waste of time, now that 5 different appellate courts say its okay), it could focus on remedying an injustice and misapplication of the UDRP and ACPA. This case is a classic example of a complainant overstepping the bounds of what should be allowed, and a court failing to grasp how the process really works.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re: EFF, Where are you?
      by Anonymous on Friday April 05 2002, @11:35AM (#5725)
      Anyone from the EFF care to respond? Or are you too busy to defend someone who needs real help?
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com