[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[comments-gtlds] forwarded for Michael Heltzer

>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 23:16:56 +0100 (MET)
>From: owner-wg-c@dnso.org
>To: owner-wg-c@dnso.org
>Subject: BOUNCE wg-c@dnso.org:    Non-member submission from [mheltzer
>>From wg-c-listadmin@dnso.dnso.org  Mon Jan 10 23:16:55 2000
>Received: from intamail.inta.org (mail.inta.org [])
>	by dnso.dnso.org (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA09423
>	for <wg-c@dnso.org>; Mon, 10 Jan 2000 23:16:54 +0100 (MET)
>Received: by mail.inta.org with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
>	id <CS1N7QDG>; Mon, 10 Jan 2000 17:16:19 -0500
>Message-ID: <B1089AE876BFD2119B4700805F59E4FB264C5A@mail.inta.org>
>From: mheltzer <mheltzer@inta.org>
>To: "'wg-c@dnso.org'" <wg-c@dnso.org>
>Subject: Some Thoughts
>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 17:16:16 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>	charset="iso-8859-1"
>Additional Comments on New gTLDs
>The International Trademark Association ("INTA"), an organization of
>3,700 trademark owners and practitioners, wishes to reiterate its support
>for the paper submitted to the WG-C List (hereinafter referred to as the
>"List") by Ms. Caroline Chicoine. Ms. Chicoine's paper noted that the
>question of how many gTLDs should be added and how fast, should not be
>addressed until appropriate safeguards are in place in the form of i)
>improved domain name registration procedures, ii) implementation of speedy
>and effective uniform resolution procedures for abusive registrations; and
>iii) adoption of a system for protecting famous and well-known trademarks
>across all gTLDs. Once the safeguards have been adopted and are shown to be
>effective, new gTLDs may be introduced, provided they are introduced in a
>slow and controlled manner.
>We recognize that others in the Internet community disagree with
>this position. A number of the papers submitted to the List suggest that
>trademark owners are somehow acting out of avaricious tendencies and with
>little or no regard for other users of the Internet. Nothing could be
>further from the truth! At the very core of the trademark community's
>position are the interests of consumers and average"netcitizens" who use the
>Internet to make important decisions about business, education, health, and
>With the "World Wide Web" becoming ever so tangled, consumers and average
>"netcitizens" need some type of assurance that they have reached their
>intended destination in cyberspace. That assurance, that sign, whether or
>not it is incorporated in a domain name, is a trademark. This recognition
>function and the role that trademarks play in key areas such as e-commerce
>must not be overlooked in the debate over new gTLDs.  
>The debate over new gTLDs is not a matter of big corporations and trademark
>holders vs. the individual domain name holder, as some have characterized
>it. It is a matter of ensuring that the Internet continues to be a mechanism
>we can all understand and use to it fullest potential. The Internet of today
>has already presented us with opportunities we could never have imagined
>five years ago. The Internet of tomorrow, one which can be even bigger, will
>no doubt astound us.  However, it must be an Internet that has the proper
>"checks and balances" in place.  If we move too quickly on any matter,
>especially on the addition of new gTLDs,and without proper safeguards, we
>may very well place in jeopardy the goals which we all hope to achieve,
>including competition and a level playing field for Internet users of all
>sizes and interests.
>Thank you. We look forward to working with our colleagues in Cairo and
>beyond to develop a compromise.
>Mike Heltzer, INTA