We cannot really stop anyone from becoming a LIR... -- RIPE Hostmaster

At 11:16 09/05/00 +0100, mike.norris at heanet.ie wrote:
>
>> > The following is an extract from a series of communications on the
>> > subject of RIPE having recently authorised the addition of another
>> > LIR in the UK, which uses the same trading name of an existing
>> > member.  It is our feeling that RIPE should not have allowed the
>> > addition of this LIR on the basis that the company in question
>> > trades using a name which could easily confuse the general public
>> > as to which company is which and that since our company was an
>> > existing member, and had previously been a LIR in another country
>> > as well, they should have decline the application of the LIR on
>> > the basis that their trading name could cause a conflict and
>> > confuse the general public, and would further cause damage to an
>> > existing member's company and reputation.
>>
>> Hm, this seems like a strange request.
>>
>> The point of contest here seems to be the trading name used by the
>> company who is now a (newly established) LIR, not that organization's
>> ability to become a LIR.  I don't see how the RIPE NCC can be
>> concerned about the use of a trading name by an applicant for LIR
>> status, and the possible infringement on someone else's rights to that
>> name or the potential for resulting market confusion.  This issue
>> should instead be brought before the apporpriate authority, which I
>> assume would be some part of the legal system in the UK.
>>
>> Of course, I'm not a lawyer, and I even don't play one on the net, but
>> thus just seemed too obvious...
>
>I agree with Håvard.  RIPE NCC has no authority to adjudicate on
>entitlement to trading names; that's a matter for the parties concerned
>and perhaps the Companies Office in the UK.

Ditto.  Not RIPE NCC's place to be playing trademark judge.

-Hank

>
>Regards.
>
>Mike
>
>