Re: [ga] Geographic and Geopolitical Names in .info

[Alexander Svensson <alexander@svensson.de>]

Dear Elisabeth,

I certainly don't think TM rights are more important
than country rights: If there was only one TLD and
everyone had to use it, it would make sense to give
usa.tld to the United States government and france.tld
to France. However, this is not the case.
Governments have the opportunity to put their online
presence under their ccTLD, and presumably almost all
have done so. Do they need an additional gTLD presence?
They seem to feel the need, and it is not a bad idea
e.g. to have access to all government web sites (or
portals) by typing in www.countryname.gtld.

The point I was trying to make is: I don't think an
unrestricted TLD like .info is the appropriate place
for government sites. Many nice (inofficial) portal
sites have been developed under country name domains
in unrestricted TLDs, e.g. france.com, peru.com,
russia.com. This is a slippery slope: Why stop at
spain.info, not at catalonia.info or barcelona.info?
What about restricted TLDs e.g. for personal names
(anatole.france.name)?

Most of this also applies to trademarks (like Frank
McDonalds and not the fast food chain getting
frank.mcdonalds.name). I hope we can keep the list of
restrictions *across* TLDs as small as possible and
add more tailor-made TLDs. If governments feel the
need for an additional gTLD presence, ideally,
they would get france.gov, usa.gov etc. We know that
this TLD string is already in use, for historical
reasons. IMHO, the next best solution would be
something like france.official or france.int.

Best regards,
/// Alexander

Disclaimer: I'm obviously not encouraging the
strange .info sunrise-squatting registrations like
germany.info (TM number "e.g. 12345"), usa.info
(TM string "expertinfo"), spain.info (TM number
"E.G.B 12345") or norway.info (US TM 602155, which
doesn't exist).

>> Country name .info domains obtained by using false trademarks
>> should of course be auto-challenged. However, I dislike
>> the idea of closing additional parts of the domain name space,
>> especially in multiple languages, multiple variants and
>> potentially at various levels (state and city names are
>> obviously next in line). The TLD strings are also about


> Alexander,

> Would you explain why you consider trademarks rights
> more important that countrie's and people's rights ?

> Elisabeth


> ----Original Message----
> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 03:43:05 +0200
> From: Alexander Svensson <alexander@svensson.de>
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: [ga] Geographic and Geopolitical Names in .info


> Dear all,

> as you probably all know, the GAC recommended in Montevideo
> that "the use of names of countries and distinct economies
> as recognised in international fora as second level domains
> in the .info TLD should be at the discretion of the respective
> governments and public authorities."
> (http://www.icann.org/committees/gac/communique-09sep01.htm).

> The Board response:
> http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-10sep01.htm
> (General Counsel may prevent ISO 3166-1 country names
> from being registered in .info; President proposes action
> plan within 30 days, i.e. 10-Oct-01).

> What are the options?

> 1. Following GAC recommendation:
> Names of countries and distinct economies, particularly those
> contained in the ISO 3166-1 standard should be reserved in .info
> (or if registered in the Sunrise Period challenged by the
> Registry and, if successful, then reserved) in Latin characters
> in their official language(s) and in English and assigned to
> the corresponding governments and public authorities, at their
> request, for use.

> 2. Extending preliminary Board measures:
> The registration in .info of names of countries and distinct
> economies contained in the ISO 3166-1 list that have not yet
> been registered during the Sunrise Period is maintained.
> Any other such names that are returned to the database
> following a successful challenge by the Registry Operator are
> also maintained.

> 3. Reserving country codes instead of names:
> Codes of countries and distinct economies contained in the
> ISO 3166-1 list are already barred from registration
> (.info agreement, appendix K). The CC.info domain names
> (where CC is the country code) are assigned to the
> corresponding governments and public authorities, at their
> request, for use.

> 4. No reservation of country names:
> Governments may acquire their country name .info domain
> just as any other entity.

> 5. Opening .int domain space for country names:
> Currently, .int domain names are only for registering
> organizations established by international treaties
> between governments. Governments may be encouraged to
> register the names of countries and distinct economies
> contained in the ISO 3166-1 list under .int. (Note that
> palestine.int has been preceeding the .ps TLD)

> 6. Opening a new TLD for country sites:
> Instead of mixing international governmental organizations
> and country names in .int, governments may get the
> opportunity to register the names of countries and
> distinct economies contained in the ISO 3166-1 list under
> a new TLD. (The TLD string may ideally be .gov, but since
> it is unlikely that the US government will give up its use
> quickly, another TLD string would be necessary). The
> registry could be managed by IANA (having experiences with
> running a small TLD like .int).

> My own comments:
> Country name .info domains obtained by using false trademarks
> should of course be auto-challenged. However, I dislike
> the idea of closing additional parts of the domain name space,
> especially in multiple languages, multiple variants and
> potentially at various levels (state and city names are
> obviously next in line). The TLD strings are also about
> public expectations: If I can expect country.info to be
> the official site of a country's government, a commercial
> inofficial city site at city.info looks odd. Additionally,
> the GAC request comes too late for .info.
> I would prefer option 6: A TLD reserved for official country
> names. (Maybe a .travel TLD in the next TLD round would solve
> part of the problem by reserving country.travel to the
> official tourism authorities of each country.)

> Best regards,
> /// Alexander
> --
> 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@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