Re: [wg-c] trademark law & new gTLDs

[Elisabeth PORTENEUVE <Elisabeth.PORTENEUVE@cetp.ipsl.fr>]

Jumping in your conversation.

ccTLDs are not homogenous, and the sTLDs are completely
different from one country to another. In the UK
you have .co.uk similar to the NSI .com, but in
Italy .co.it is reserved for Como District.

I made a study last May (yet to be finished) about practices
in 11 selected european ccTLDs. I will try to either provide
you with the URL or summarise this weekend.

The ccTLDs practices may be extremely usefull for gTLD
consideration -- it is a large field of implementations
and every day practices, whereas we have only theoretical
approach on this list.

Elisabeth Porteneuve
--

Keith wrote:
> 
>  Mark Measday <measday@ibm.net> wrote
> 
> >Keith,
> >
> >Sounds incredibly sensible, although one regrets reducing the sensitive
> arcana
> >of your profession to the crudities of YP. I doubt US, UK and Spanish YPs
> would
> >maintain the same categorizations, for example, to introduce one of the
> >international complications.
> 
> For the reasons you give, I think this is the sort of initiative which would
> best be led nationally by innovative ccTLD operators, and I would hold off
> looking at gTLD categorisation (and adding lots of GTLDs).
> 
> There may be a case for considering selected clear cases where international
> consensus could be shown (e.g for registration by airlines in a .airline for
> example)  and ICANN could invite proposals for consideration by the DNSO for
> that purpose.
> 
> >Shouldn't businesses pay for a facility of such ease-of-use, where DNS/tm
> >issues are reconciled and there is reduced risk of legal liability for the
> >various infringements?
> 
> If it were exclusively a business issue, perhaps, but it isn't.  It's a
> general issue of organising the namespace in an intelligent and logical
> fashion in the greater interest of ALL internet users, consumers, businesses
> and the rest, not just for the private profit of a few would-be registry
> operators.
> 
> >Who would sponsor the production of the appropriate taxonomy, WIPO? Surely
> >something exists somewhere, already?
> 
> At national level I would see ccTLD operators taking a pro-active view and
> getting a broad based consultative committee together themselves of users,
> business, YP etc
> 
> 
> >Would there be any need for reconciliation with existing national and
> >reciprocal tm arrangements for the mapping of global DNS to international
> tm
> >taxonomies?
> 
> It would clearly be desirable for national ccTLDs sharing the same language
> to have consistent SLDs for the YP categories, but it's not essential (cf.
> .co.uk .com.au etc)
> 
> K
> 
>