RE: Re[4]: [wg-c] Re: IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

Hello all,

I'd like everyone to notice that this may be the very first time that
most of the major players are all togetther in a mailing-list
conference. Aside from the historical novelty, this marks only the third
time, that I know of, that many of the parties are together, talking
about these issues. What I'd not like to see is to bring this discussion
down to the same old issues that many of us have beat, until beyond
death, on the InterNIC DOMAIN-POLICY list.

We have the opportunity to treat some new issues to a similar fate. We
have an unreasonably short time, let's make use of it.

1) We keep talking past each other. Maybe it's a new list, but I am
starting to see historical patterns. I bring up registries and Kent
brings up examples against 100's of gTLDs. I have submited that they are
not the same issue at all. I have heard agreement, even from Kent. Yet
we keep hearing the same cross arguments. Let's, at least, keep apples
... with apples. This is only one clear example, there are others.

2) IMHO, the first main issue is the number of registries, not the
number of gTLDs. As observed earlier, one registry can spawn a HUGE
number of TLDs, at small incremental cost, once the registry itself is
established and paid-for. In fact, the difference, between one TLD and
another, is primarily one of marketing and branding. NSI has spent a
huge amount on marketing COM/NET/ORG and the DOT COM brand. IMHO, this
is the real reason that COM is so successful, as opposed to the other
registries.

3) The success, in 2, is what leads to the commoditization of the other
TLDs. This is to the point that US PTO doesn't consider the TLD portion,
of the domain name, of sufficient significance to warrant it to be a
discriminator, when determining trademark issues, in domain names. This
item is terribly important. It means that the courts, if faced with
trademark issues between COM and TO (both operators are physically in US
jusrisdiction), could actually order TO to delete the name. This would
create a serious compliance problem for the TO ccTLD operators. Why this
hasn't happened yet is beyond me. To most of the Internet, only COM
exists.

The solution to 3 is more TLDs, but they have to be stronger. They have
to NOT be a commodity.