Re: [wg-c] chartered tlds

["Martin B. Schwimmer" <martys@interport.net>]

.GmbH is not meaningless by default and does not ignore the multi-lingual
internet, being the German corporate suffix. Its existence is additional to
and not instead of other TLDs (which could be added at a later time) so I
don't see it how it restrains free expression (and in the sense that the
only person who should own xyz.gmbh is XYZ GmbH it doesn't unreasonably
restrain expression any more than existing law already does).  As for an
unfair restraint of commerce, how you figure?


At 04:42 PM 12/21/99 -0500, you wrote:
>A TLD is meaningless by default and gains its meaning
>only through use and contex.
>
>Chartering TLDs not only ignores the multi lingual internet,
>but it also amounts to unfair restraint of commerce and
>free expression.
>
>Generic means just that.
>
>Paul Garrin
>
>
>
> 
>> I think I have what you want, right here:
>> 
>> http://www.dnso.net/library/dnso-tld.mhsc-position.shtml
>> 
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: owner-wg-c@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-c@dnso.org]On 
>> > Behalf Of Rick
>> > H Wesson
>> > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 1999 10:11 AM
>> > To: wg-c@dnso.org
>> > Subject: [wg-c] chartered tlds
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > I think we have experenced what market forces do to chartered 
>> > gTLDs. we
>> > should observe that the (g) in gTLDs stands for generic. I 
>> > also strongly
>> > believe that chartering is moot without making specific provisions for
>> > repremanding registries that don't follow the charter.
>> > 
>> > I doubt that anyone wants to set up the provisions for monitering and
>> > management of the oversight that would be required for enforceing the
>> > charters.
>> 
>
>---------------------------------------------------------
>Get Free Private Encrypted Email https://mail.lokmail.net
>
>
>
>
>

@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @