[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[wg-b] Input to wg-b report
For the record, here is the document I sent to Michel for inclusion
in the WG-B report.
I hope you'll include this input with your current report.
First, the "sunrise" proposal. This was not been discussed on-list, and
if any consensus-building has occurred around it, it's occurred behind
closed doors. I urge you to not include it in the report. If you do,
a very large, public stink will ensue.
Given the TM interests concerns, I would be willing to entertain a
famous mark list, a sunrise period, and other remedies IN THE FOLLOWING
Certain chartered TLDs are created to correspond to the mark categories
created and managed under US law and international treaty. The remedies
I will accede to will only be applied to these TLDs as an exception to
namespace, not as the rule. I.e., these remedies will only by applied to
those chartered TLDs that correspond directly and by definition in the
charter to business categories.
For example, create TLDs under the existing country-code TLDs that
correspond to each of the 30-odd categories currently defined under
US and international law. Any remedies that the TM interests wish to
apply may exist under these, and only these, TLDs. This creates a
'sandbox' of a sort for the TM interests. It also addresses the
following issues that the TM interests have raised in opposition to
the introduction of new TLDs:
* Policing cost. By creating a limited number of commercial, IP-only
TLDs, there will be a finite set of TLDs the TM interests must police,
* Consumer confusion. By establishing these new TLDs, consumer
confusion can be minimized. If there's ever any doubt as to where
a famous or popular mark owner has a presence, the consumer can
confidently look to these new TLDs and know that the framework in
place guarantees that the site found is the legitimate site corresponding
to said mark. All other TLDs become irrelevant as regards policing and
consumer confusion, because the TM interests have their own special,
bounded space in which to conduct their business.
* Cybersquatting. Given the limits and the direct application of
existing legal boundaries and categories to these new TLDs, cybersquatting
will be minimized. TLDs outside these will be irrelevant, since the
branding will lead consumers to know that only those domains within these
special TLDs are those that correspond to famous marks.
* No new movement, elimination, or re-branding. Owners don't need
to migrate away from .com, or rebrand. These new domains will be
in addition to their existing holdings. So, for example, Amazon.com
will have amazon.FOO, and can simply redirect it to amazon.com. If
there's ever any doubt in the consumer's mind (confusion) as to the
real amazon site, they can visit amazon.FOO to be sure.
Mark C. Langston
Systems & Network Admin
San Jose, CA