Re: Community Input Requested on Trustees' Intent to Renounce "IETF Secretariat" Trademark

Ray Pelletier <rpelletier@isoc.org> Wed, 09 April 2014 17:48 UTC

Return-Path: <rpelletier@isoc.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0984B1A02D4; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 10:48:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.502
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GN60jYj02W8b; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 10:48:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1lp0144.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.144]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B53E1A0303; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 10:48:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.34] (69.131.53.57) by BY2PR06MB234.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.242.47.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.913.9; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 17:47:58 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
Subject: Re: Community Input Requested on Trustees' Intent to Renounce "IETF Secretariat" Trademark
From: Ray Pelletier <rpelletier@isoc.org>
In-Reply-To: <0F1BA31B-4580-4AC0-9CB4-7FC0EE3860B0@firsthand.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 13:47:48 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <7FA1855F-AE17-41DC-B0CD-1A11B293C5A3@isoc.org>
References: <20140404180001.19898.85635.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <533EF5BE.7080300@dcrocker.net> <DDC6FCD7-B956-44A8-AAA9-AA798EA94B80@isoc.org> <8A8DDF7840E041B5EFDAC863@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <F8B2F4F2-4B8F-49A8-8233-E80BAE737128@isoc.org> <0F1BA31B-4580-4AC0-9CB4-7FC0EE3860B0@firsthand.net>
To: cdel.firsthand.net <cdel@firsthand.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
X-Originating-IP: [69.131.53.57]
X-ClientProxiedBy: BLUPR06CA004.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.255.223.142) To BY2PR06MB234.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.242.47.20)
X-Forefront-PRVS: 01762B0D64
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019001)(6009001)(6049001)(428001)(377454003)(51704005)(199002)(189002)(24454002)(74502001)(92566001)(77982001)(81342001)(99396002)(92726001)(80976001)(57306001)(82746002)(46102001)(50466002)(79102001)(20776003)(50226001)(83322001)(4396001)(88136002)(36756003)(74662001)(89996001)(93916002)(19580405001)(86362001)(42186004)(87976001)(31966008)(62966002)(81542001)(19580395003)(23746002)(83072002)(80022001)(66066001)(87286001)(77156001)(83716003)(33656001)(76482001)(47776003)(85852003)(50986999)(76176999); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR06MB234; H:[192.168.0.34]; FPR:1CC4F01C.AF2297E8.F1E3736B.84E6D9AB.20336; MLV:sfv; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
Received-SPF: None (: isoc.org does not designate permitted sender hosts)
X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/M80qepso2-93Q0kxzMta03uTdwo
Cc: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, IAOC <iaoc@ietf.org>, "iab@iab.org IAB" <iab@iab.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 17:48:07 -0000

 
On Apr 4, 2014, at 6:08 PM, cdel.firsthand.net <cdel@firsthand.net> wrote:

> I was about to ask under what classes IETF registrations are held? 

IETF is in Class 42.

The IETF Logo is in the following classes:  9, 35, 42

“IETF Secretariat” is in: 35, 42.

Ray


> 
> 
> Christian de Larrinaga
> 
> 
>> On 4 Apr 2014, at 22:57, Ray Pelletier <rpelletier@isoc.org> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Apr 4, 2014, at 3:45 PM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --On Friday, April 04, 2014 14:19 -0400 Ray Pelletier
>>> <rpelletier@isoc.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> It sounds as if this will open the door to my being able to
>>>>> advertise myself as the IETF Secretariat.  Or even the ITU's
>>>>> being able to.  Yes?
>>>> 
>>>> You could certainly use "Secretariat" but you cannot use
>>>> "IETF Secretariat" without violating the "IETF"
>>>> trademark.
>>> 
>>> Ray, I assume that if Dave (or someone else) set themselves up
>>> as the International Elegant Tophat Fabrication Society, made at
>>> least a perfunctory effect to establish themselves as being in
>>> that business, established a business unit that they called
>>> their "Secretariat", and then advertised the result as the "IETF
>>> Secretariat", things could get dicey.  Given the different line
>>> of business, they might even be able to take out a trademark on
>>> "IETF Secretariat".  Right?
>> 
>> The "risk" applies to IETF in addition to IETF Secretariat.  
>> We don't own IETF in every class of goods and services. 
>> IETF bananas, top hats and car tires can be sold and  
>> that won’t violate our IETF trademark  
>> 
>> People aren’t going to be confused between the two,
>> just like they aren’t for Apple computers and Apple records.
>> 
>> Ray
>>> 
>>> Now, whether having a trademark registered as "IETF Secretariat"
>>> with whatever line of business the IETF and IETF Secretariat
>>> claim to be in would offer significant protection against that
>>> attack is far outside my knowledge or experience.
>>> 
>>> I have enough trouble imagining someone going to the trouble to
>>> attempt the above as an attack that I think it would probably be
>>> foolish to worry about it, but it is, in principle, the
>>> difference between "no risk" and "no risk worth worrying about".
>>> 
>>>  john
>>