Re: (Fwd) Re: [ga] .sys and .wiz IP protection current approach

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Hi! "jandl",
would you be informed: this issue has been nicely hanled for a long
- apart from the rights I own to be on other files, being a registered
   corp, presented at the ICANN, etc..
- apart from having no information on what that TLD has been set for
- we entered into an agreement with Gene Marsh (we are waiting
   for his draft contract) to acquire whatever will be spelled in that
   contract. This is a very interesting piece of works since it is the
   first settlement ever between two clones turning down Roberto's fears.
   Gene and I stated that we wanted this common endeavor to serve
   as an experience to everyone and decided to publish everything
   but the invoved amount on the ORSC distribution list.
   (However I understand that Gene may be slow producing the
   draft as there are several issues creating problems due to the
   obvious inadequacy of RFC 2826)
All the best.
Jefsey

At 01:07 04/09/00, you wrote:
>You might want to check the ORSC root zone file.  You have a
>collision with an exsiting TLD which has been there for years.
>
>------- Forwarded message follows -------
>From:                   JandL <jandl@jandl.com>
>To:                     jefsey@wanadoo.fr
>Subject:                Re: [ga] .sys and .wiz IP protection current approach
>Send reply to:          jandl@jandl.com
>Date sent:              Sun, 3 Sep 2000 19:06:58 -0400
>
>At 13:10 03/09/00, you wrote:
> >Marc, Jefsey,
> >
> >The 30-days waiting time was widely discussed at the IAHC timem
>few
> >years ago - gee, it is only three years, in fact, but it seems
>another
> >millennium ;>). The public enquiry clearly rejected it. Thios said,
>why
> >could not different Registries implement different policies? In a TLD
> >where TMs are stricly enforced, this would make sense , while in a
>TLD
> >for strictly individualm or non-commercial use this would not maker
> >sense. Regards Roberto
>
>Roberto,
>I did not propose that solution for every TLD. I just said that two
>TLD comities out of three I participate in have decided to study:
>
>-  UDRP enforcement after the matter defintion is included
>     (definition of the DN or what is quivalently used by these TLDs) -
>  TLD rules:
>     -  resale of domain name authorized, transfer authorized
>        between affiliates. So DN may be invested in projects.
>     -  provisional yet immediate operations granted for a new
>        domain name. UDRP authorized within the first 30 days
>        for TM owned having registered their TM during the last
>        30 days before the DN registration.
>    -   initial period: no registration for 3 months. At the end
>        of the 3 months, DN requested by a single registrants
>        are granted; DN requested by several registrants are
>        subject to an UDRP to determine the winner.
>
>The desired target is to create a de facto group of TLD of
>worldwide internet sub-classes. The DN notion is to be
>carefully though about as we introduce new concepts as
>formats (".sys") or rules (".wiz") which are more intellectual
>that industrial property oriented.
>Jefsey
>
>PS. FYI .SYS and .WIZ are to comities for the management
>by the registrants of respectively the ".sys" and ".wiz" TLDs
>incorporated under the French non-profit law.
>
>
>
>------- End of forwarded message -------

--
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