RE: [ga] Net-block issues

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Der Peter, Bill and Roeland,
Domain names exist outside of the DNS name space. They usually are used for 
users convenience - to help finding the domain - when registering a 
mnemonic for the domain's IP address.

Domains include properties such as web site, e-mail mailboxes,  ftp 
services, production database, webmaster offices and staff, printed 
advertising ion the domain, IP rights including TMs, etc...

The task of the Registry is only to enter in the TLD Register the name of 
the Domain. It is legitimate that he protects himself against a mistake or 
a fraud. This only concerns the use of the name of another domain when 
registering the name of a domain. As if I was registering in an hotel as 
Roeland Meyer. The only act of the Registry and its only responsibility is 
equivalent to Holiday INN signing me for one night under a false name. It 
provides as service - registering me - not a right it has not.

Now the only problem is that some people create on-purpose domain. i.e. 
gather properties only for the Internet and may lead to confusion with 
pre-existing domains. IMHO the issue is so complex and so subjective - as 
the "famous" trademark issue show it - that the simplest is to address in 
the proper way: is or not the name used confusing the user (you will 
remember that a TM is only here to remove confusion between two similar 
products). Only users can say that.

We use to poll users all the day long. We have sophisticated, powerful and 
cheap tools for that. The UDRP should only be a poll taken on a randomly 
chose appropriate panel (Jury) saying or not if they get confused and which 
site seems most appropriate for them to be associated to the domain name.
- famous TM and sensitive geographical terms will certainly be considered 
easily
- complex comparison between ASCII, Chinese, Japanese, Korean etc... being 
obvious to the panel
- TLD influence instinctively addressed
- fairness supported: each party will explain its story, plans etc.. 
on-line and the users will react as consumers, pleased or not with the 
ideas they are explained.

Also, such UDRP being a non-confusion test should be available to new 
Registrants. So they might take an UDRP test for their new DN? They would 
obviously show their good faith since anyone could challenge them - a 
permanent sunrise. If the response is positive, they could be UDRP free for 
ever and therefore insured that they can invest on the name.

Jefsey

PS. I find interesting the dicussion about the legal authority of the 
ICANN. It confirms that it has authority through the contracts it signs, 
the only real contracts being with the DoC when buying the IANA fuctions 
for less than $ 10.000, the NSI contract and the gTLD countracts. 
Considering that the NSI and TLD contracts are - according to the IANA 
delegation - to be signed by the DoC, the ICANN has no legal authirity, 
while the AmerICANN has the support of the DoC. Until now no other Gov. has 
given any legal authority to the CanICANN, to the MexICANN to the AfrICANN 
or to the EurICANN ....





On 16:38 21/08/01, Roeland Meyer said:
>|> From: Peter de Blanc [mailto:pdeblanc@usvi.net]
>|> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 4:20 AM
>
>|> All of this comes by contract. Anyone is free to enter into, or not
>|> enter into a contract, or, for that matter, to attempt to
>|> negotiate the terms.
>|>
>|> All terms, including UDRP, could be re-negotiated in the future,
>|> provided enough of the stakeholders wish to.
>
>This is not true in the case of a monopoly, like Standard Oil, AT&T, and
>ICANN. The only alternative is to form another zone management org, with
>different contracts. In light of that, how would you like me to interpret
>your statement?
>--
>This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
>Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html