Re: Re[2]: [wg-c] "Public" resources -Reply

[Anthony Lupo <AVLUPO@arentfox.com>]

I see a potential problem with this approach.  Yahoo or any other
trademark owner will not enter into any agreement where they
could potentially lose control over their mark merely because they
want to abandon the project because of the economics.
 In fact, if they did so, it might subject the mark to attack later
down the line.  

Tony
>>> "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@ebarn.com> 08/10 1:27 pm >>>
> > Very reasonable, the only issue that we would have to be wary
of is one
> > where the firm has a vested interest in the IP after the registry
is no
> > longer viable (ie - Yahoo may want to launch a .yahoo tld. After
signing
> up
> > thousands of their web-hosting customers, they decide to
withdraw the
> > service due to a bad revenue model) Not taking this into
account would
> > strand a large constituency.
> >
> > Do we care?
>
> Sure we do. Contractually bind Yahoo, as part of the root-entry
process,
> to pledge the IP in the specific case of insolvency or
abandonment for
> any reason. That's what contracts are for.
>

So in effect, we end up raising the bar to ensure that "dabblers"
are
discouraged and the constituents of .yahoo and .web are
protected.

Not bad...does this constitute forward process? ;)

-RWR