Re: [wg-c] Choosing the intial testbed

[John Charles Broomfield <jbroom@manta.outremer.com>]

> Selecting names before selecting registries is putting the cart well before
> the horse.

I actually feel its just as bad to do it the other way around. In fact I
feel that it is two carts or two horses (depending how you look at it). In
other words, I fail to see this obligatory tie in between the registry
operator and the TLD.

> What if a name selected is .ATT?
> What if AT&T wants to run .ATT but it's not selected?

That's easy: so as to avoid that tie-in between registry operator and TLD,
no combination of characters that make up enforceable trademarks should be
allowed at this stage. We are after all talking about gTLDs where the "g"
stands for generic. We are NOT talking about creating TLDs which are the
registered trademarks of companies, are we?
I'm sure that ".ibm", ".adidas", ".linux", ".toyota", ".pepsi" etc would be
great TLDs from the point of view of their respective owners, but I can't
quite see the usefulness to the rest of the 'net for them. Any TLD selected
should have a period *before* becoming operational where any company that
thinks it is entitled to it could make that claim so as to eliminate it from
the list to avoid the dilution of that particular companies trademark.
Now, I know the claim to fame of IOD that they state that ".web" is a
trademark of theirs, but then if it *IS* a trademark, it can't be a gTLD (by
definition) as it is not a generic (generics can't be trademarked). So,
either it is generic (in which case the IOD trademark doesn't apply), or it
is an IOD trademark (in which case it is not generic, and we can safely
forget about it for the time being). Can't have it both ways I'm afraid.

> What if the names selected are .u4x, .hhrhr, and .w83hjf?

I have yet to see *any* list of TLDs from *any* camp to come up with a list
along those lines. If they did, they would be thrown straight back. What if
the sky falls on our heads tomorrow? 

> The middle-road solution is to set down objective criteria that a registry
> must meet (much like was done for registrars), and accept applications
> based upon that criteria.

Ok up to there.

> Each application will also contain the single TLD
> that the applying registry wishes to run, based on their business plan and
> marketing data.

I fail to see the need, interest or advantage to the internet community at
large to tie these two things together. I can perfectly see where you're
coming from, which is that you feel that ".web" if inserted in the root
would be an instant winner (I feel that way too), and that you want to
somehow tie it up to IOD, but (as stated) I see neither need, interest or
advantage to the internet in doing so (tieing ".web" to IOD I mean).

Yours, John Broomfield.