RE: [wg-c] RE: [wg-c-1] Consensus on having new TLDs?

[john.c.lewis@bt.com]

This appears to be an eminently sensible proposal; there does appear to be a
need for sequencing the priorities so that we don't create additional
problems until we have resolved the most important ones. Hence the benefit
of resolving the dispute resolution in a workable and pragmatic manner
first. Maybe there is a need for co-ordination of domestic and international
law on trademarks, but this is an action for the GAC to take away while the
customers of the Internet have access to some resolution mechanism in the
shorter term.

Regards

John C Lewis
Manager - International Organisations Europe
BT delegate ETNO Executive Board
BT delegate EURODATA Foundation Board
Tel: +44 (0) 1442 295258 Mob: +44 (0) 802 218271
Fax: +44 (0) 1442 295861

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Ivan Pope [SMTP:ivan@netnames.com]
> Sent:	16 July 1999 10:01
> To:	'Rita M. Odin'; javier@aui.es; kstubbs@dninet.net;
> Tod_Cohen@mpaa.org; 'wg-c@dnso.org'
> Subject:	[wg-c] RE: [wg-c-1] Consensus on having new TLDs?
> 
> 
> > It is not only important to wait until the famous marks issue 
> > has been resolved, but it is imperative that the dispute 
> > resolution mechanism be in place prior to the addition of any 
> > new gTLDs.  
> 
> I think we should proceed on the assumption that ADR, dispute resolution
> and
> famous marks issues will be sorted alongside the introduction of new gTLDs
> -
> but that this should not for one moment delay our work in this WG. We are
> here to work on proposals for handling new gTLDs, not on IP issues.
> If we let IP issues interfere with our work we will end up like the
> situation in Northern Ireland - trying to get new gTLDs introduced before
> the cybersquatters have disarmed - or something :-)
> Ivan