new policy re:dispute over registered net names

[biker <harleydavidson@cableregina.com>]

i think you better watch your step in what you are proposing because
when any lawyers are involved in setting up the draft of arbitration,
you have to know that they have a very one sided profit agenda in mind
for them selves. "automatic arbitration at 1,000.00 dollars"/head is
good money for a bunch of notorized predators. just because some one who
owns a trademarked name and didn't take the time to register it on the
net earlier than some one else who does not own a trade mark to that
particular name does not mean that "trademark" can suddenly come along
and use the courts to steal the un-trademark's earlier name registration
from them. "mr. trademark" has had plenty of time to check to see if
someone else beat him to the punch as the net has been up and running
for a number of years now.! whats to stop one from running out and
"trademarking" a name they saw on the net and  crying foul even though
the name was registered say for example; two years or so ago on the net?
the first rule of consideration should be:when was the name "registered"
with the internic people?,and when was the name "trademarked"?if the
name was trademarked first,(and did the owner have a reasonable amount
of time to register his claim with internic?)if so, but did not, then
the non-trademarked name registered with internic should stand firm as
the rightful one and not granted to the "trademark"holder.?! let
sleeping dogs lay!i for one will be very disappointed if you allow
"trademarks" to rule priority over everything and anything else. i as a
canadian, always believed that the united states of america was the for
runner of "fair-play" and not a "dog eat dog" attitude for judgement in
your courts.?! respectfully and sincerly george mackinnon (owner of many
.com .net .org names)