Re: Veronica.org domain

[Russell Gulman <ucsd.rgulman@edu>]

Archie comics has yielded. Way to stand up for the little guy, Carl.

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9901/20/veronicas.web2.ap/

R

>Dear esteemed producers of Archie Comics,
>
>    I have recently learned of your campaign to take over the veronica.org
>Internet domain.  I wish to voice strong protest to this action, and ask
>that you desist further attempts to usurp the domain.  Your action is
>without technical, legal, moral, or business merit, and therefore is
>extremely ill-advised.
>
>Technical:
>    Archie Comics is a for-profit business venture.  As private citizens
>doing nothing more than posting pictures of, and text about their daughter,
>and not making any attempt to sell or advertise anything, the current
>owners of veronica.org are, without a doubt, classed as a non-profit
>organization.  Internet naming protocol is clear.  For-profit business
>ventures use domains ending in .com, and non-profit organizations use
>domains ending in .org.  For-profit businesses do not belong in .org, and
>any attempt for a business to take over a .org domain is a clear violation
>of proper namespace management on the Internet.  Summary: you have no
>technical claim to veronica.org; on the contrary, technical arguments say
>you should not have veronica.org.
>
>Legal:
>    I anticipate that you'll send me the typical corporate response: we
>have a responsibility to our shareholders / investors / owners / future
>profitability and name recognition to protect our trademarks / intellectual
>property and ensure that our customers do not confuse our trademarks /
>characters / corporate icons with other things unrelated to Archie Comics.
>I have one word for that response: bullshit.  Immediately upon viewing the
>opening page at veronica.org, it is 100% clear that this page has no
>affiliation with Archie Comics whatsoever.  Based on that, and the widely
>known and respected (except by you) deliniation between .com and .org, no
>sane person could confuse you with veronica.org.  Furthermore, the owners
>of veronica.org have not used any pictures, descriptions, accounts,
>references, or other depictions of any of your comics or characters, so
>the trademark argument boils down to one thing: the name Veronica.  And
>here, you haven't a legal leg to stand on.  You can't trademark the name
>Veronica -- it's in common usage and has been for centuries.  Parents all
>over the world have legal claim to use it for naming their children and
>their websites.  Your action of attempting to take over the veronica.org
>domain does not protect any trademarks or intellectual property, and does
>not alleviate any customer confusion because there is none in the first
>place.  It is purely an act of corporate larceny.  You can afford an army
>of lawyers to pound Veronica's parents into submission, and they can't
>afford an army of lawyers to pound back.  You like the odds, so you'll give
>it a try.
>
>Moral:
>    There is nothing moral about attempting to steal something you have no
>claim to, be it at gunpoint, or at preliminary-injunction-point.  Dare I
>point out the striking parallels between your action and the common phrase
>"like taking candy from a baby"?
>
>Business:
>    I have already made the assertion in the "legal" section that this
>action, should you succeed, will garner no business benefit, and defended it
>adequately, showing that there is no trademark to defend, and no customer
>confusion to alleviate.  Now let's look at the negative business
>ramifications of your action, namely customer ill will generated by the
>amorality and lack of technical or legal justification of your action.  This
>is exactly the kind of action that grabs the attention of people who use the
>Internet frequently, and understand how it works (and how it should work).
>Word will spread of your action, and many who hear of it will be as appalled
>as I am.  Those who are will happily boycott Archie Comics in response.  To
>demonstrate this point, I ask you to look at the CC message header and note
>all of the friends, acquiantances, and colleagues of mine that are reading
>this as you are.  Now they know what you are up to, most will frown on it,
>many will join the boycott, and a few may even write you separately to
>inform you of this.  Your action has no business benefits, and one major
>business drawback, and therefore is not a good business decision.  I urge you
>to rethink the logic of your action.
>
>Thank you for your time in listening to my opinion on this matter.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Carl N Miller                   (devastator.chaz@extern.ucsd.edu)
>informed Internet user
>
>The opinions expressed are my own only, and in no way reflect the official
>business position of my employer.