Suggestions (Re: [wg-c] Schwimmer Post From Last Week )

["Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>]

On 21 December 1999, "Martin B. Schwimmer" <martys@interport.net> wrote:


>Well, this is a more constructrive thread than the "fun with Schwimmer"
>heading Mueller wrote last year.
>
>Proposed TLD - .gmbh
>Restriction - you have to be a GmbH with a name materially identical to
>your .gmbh registration (i.e. Porche International GmbH can register
>porsche.gmbh, porsche-intl.gmbh).  You mail a simple (non-certified) copy
>of an extract of the commercial registration to the registrar within 60
>days of getting the DN.  
>Registrars - identical procedure to .com accredidation (could be for profit
>or non-profit)
>Register - Lockheed or whoever else proves in a competitive bid that they
>are good at being a register.  Experience in not losing races.com a plus
>(could be for profit or non-profit)
>
>Proposed TLD - .anon
>Restriction - may not be used to offer goods or services.  unverifiable
>contact info is not grounds for de-registration
>Registrars - same as above
>Register- same as above
>
>Proposed TLD - .nom
>Restriction - your name should be materially identical to the .nom
>registration.  You mail a copy of proof of identity within 30 days of
>getting the DN.
>Registrars - same as above
>Register - same as above
>
>Proposed TLD - .wind
>Restirction - none
>Registrars - same as above
>Register - same as above
>
>Proposed TLD - .space
>Restriction - none
>Registrars - same as above
>Register - same as above
>
>Proposed TLD - .cpa
>Restriction - name must either be materially identical to a CPA firm or
>material identical to the name of a CPA.
>Registrars - same as above
>Register - same as above
>


While I still think the idea of chartered TLDs is a viable one, I'd like
to make one suggestion:  For those groups that have specific TLDs 
allocated for them, they may not cross-register their SLD in another
TLD.

For example, porsche.com, the car manufacturer, can not register
porsche.wind, porsche.space, or any other SLD that is not in an
explicity commercial or trade/famous mark-related TLD.

The reasoning for the suggestion is a simple one:  Without such protections,
the big companies get their own 'private' TLDs, *and* they get to run 
roughshod over every other TLD in existence.  If they are to be given
the concession of their own sandbox, it'd only be fair to take measures
to ensure they stay out of everyone else's.

In short, if we're to create chartered TLDs to help expand available
namespace, then we must take steps to ensure trade and famous marks don't
simply register all variants of their marks in all new chartered TLDs,
thus creating X number of new .com spaces, in essence.


I'd also, personally like to see one or more chartered TLDs in which
transfer or resale of the SLD by the registrant is forbidden.  This
would further curb the practice of companies buying large sets of
TLDs in bulk with an eye to reselling them at a higher price.
In these instances, the contract would act as a "no-sublet" lease.
The domain name goes back into the free pool when the lease expires,
and is otherwise non-transferrable.

-- 
Mark C. Langston
mark@bitshift.org
Systems Admin
San Jose, CA