Re: [IFWP] Revised bylaw Article VI-B (DNSO subject-matter jurisdiction)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Kevin and all,

Kevin M. Kelly wrote:

> Roeland M.J. Meyer  wrote:
> >
> >A TLD that has been legally protected, via association with a
> >trademark, may tell the ICANN/DNSO exactly which dark place to put
> >their policies, or which rope to PUAR. If the theory holds. In
> >other words, the jurisdiction doesn't hold water.
> >
> Perhaps another consideration (in lay terms) is that a want-to-be TLD (e.g.,
> .info) that had been legally protected with a trademark, doesn't have a
> snowball's chance in hell of becoming a TLD (e.g., .com) because ICANN/DNSO
> will be smart enough to choose new TLDs that can be made available without
> legal restrictions by others.

  This is an interesting take.  However IMHO if ICANN takes that decision
from a recommendation from the DNSO, it would be unwise as it would
look bad politically for a number of reasons which should be fairly
obvious.  However overall it would not make much difference should
ICANN/DNSO make that sort of determination.  In the end it will be
the user/stakeholder that will decide which gTLD's that they wish to
use.

>
>
> Kevin
>

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208