RE: [ga] new TLDs

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

At 19:04 03/09/00, you wrote:
>At 05:29 PM 9/1/00 +0200, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>>IMHO, the only reason for adding TLDs is to add diversity of models.
>>...
>>If the models are diversified, it will make no sense (and in some cases
>>...
>>If, OTOH, the ICANN Board selects just some clones of .com (like .firm, 
>>biz, or whatever), I agree that we are in trouble.But why should they?
>
>The original reasons for pursuing additional gTLDs were to increase the 
>amount of name space and to increase competition among those supplying 
>registration services.  The focus on formally "different models" -- and 
>especially the idea of enforced restriction on registrations under 
>"chartered" TLDs -- are of rather recent vintage.

The Yokohama resolution and the TLD filing documents insists on innovation.
I head to comities for innovative TLDs (the nature of the DN and management
is enhanced without modifying the DNS but adding "plug-ins" to neameservers.

This has obviously no interest for ICANN: what has is:
- please send your K$50 check
- please demonstrate us that we will make $.33 per annum/DN
- please sign that you will not claim any industrial property on your concepts
- please sign we may take over management from you

Problems:
-  the management is collaborative among registrants
-  we permit registering an unlimited number of dynamic DNs for $1000/year
-  we retain property - even under GNU licence - for R&D to be possible

>The idea behind having different kinds of gTLD strings was the hope that 
>they would have different appeal, not that there would be any difference 
>in the legal basis for resolving a trademark conflict.  Indeed it is 
>difficult to imagine the courts producing differential outcomes unless the 
>assignment process has differential enforcement rules.

We do not accept TM conflicts. Because we want them to be solved
upfront both by DN registrant and by TM registrant. We will possibly
incorporate the service under a state giving us that protection. Also,
our approach is not about TM but about intellectual property.

>The mere fact that the TLD string is different and, perhaps, has a 
>different description associated with it sounds like a pretty weak legal 
>argument, on its own.  The counterpoints are that a) the mere fact that 
>the strings IS different and therefore that two different domain names 
>really are different, and b) well-established base of industry practise 
>supporting the difference, such as between .com and .org.

Jon Postel's position (RFC) is that it is very unlikely that there are noew 
gTLDs.

Jefsey


--
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