Re[2]: [wg-c] Re: IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs

["William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net>]

Monday, August 02, 1999, 12:49:09 PM, Kevin J. Connolly <CONNOLLK@rspab.com> wrote:

> One of the things that bothers me is that my points 
> keep getting turned into strawmen.

> We are dealing with a demonstrated 357-kilo gorilla.  
> It has some very well-defined objectives.  We can either
> ignore those objectives, and make about as much 
> difference in the Internet as the IAHC did, or we can
> address those objectives, in which case we have a very
> good chance of seeing our proposals become reality.

> Talk about adding seven new registries and 21 new gTLDs
> to the root right away, and in fact you're galvanizing a fairly
> powerful lobby into opposing us.  The TM interests spent many
> buckets of ducats last time to make the IAHC proposal die;
> it's not very likely that they'll be asleep at the switch when a
> proposal of at least three times the magnitude of the IAHC
> proposal gets floated.

> Unless, of course, someone has about $25MM to start a very classy
> PR campaign.  Donors, anyone?

So the rights of domain name owners to due process are sacrificed
because the trademark interests will lobby against new gTLDs?

Lets get them on the record them.  The IP constituency is represented
here.  If no mandatory uniform dispute policy is adopted for gTLDs,
will you lobby against the creation of new gTLDs?

Are you aware of the PR Nightware they would create and the consumer
backlash such a move would have for them?

The internet has developed quite a reputation for grass roots efforts
to oppose corporate attempts at bullying individual rights on the
internet, do you really think such a move would be permitted to go on
silently?

Do you think they are naive enough to actually take that position?
You give them more power than they have.

The fact that the IP groups will lobby against new gTLDs if their
agenda is not approved that would deprive domain name holders of due
process rights should not have any consideration at all in the
determination of the desirability of such a policy.  That is nothing
more than acceding to the demands of a school yard bully.

This argument is the one argument that NEEDS to be thown out of any
consideration.  To grant it legitimacy is to say that we are slave to
whichever special interest has the most money to fight against what is
right.

Please come up with a better and more valid argument than the school
yard bully argument as a justification for these proposals.

--
William X. Walsh
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
Email: william@dso.net  Fax:(209) 671-7934


(IDNO MEMBER)
Support the Cyberspace Association, the 
constituency of Individual Domain Name Owners 
http://www.idno.org