[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [wg-b] Famous Third-Level Domains
This brings us into new territory. Previously, third-level domains were
considered immune and I believe case-law supported this, at least partially.
There were only a few third-level registries (ie. ML.ORG). Your statement
encompasses those registries, as registry and registrant are then two
different entities. Once we do this, we are also talking fifth-level and
onwards. Is this the intent?
The main problem, as I see it, is the case where they are the same entity. I
could declare WWW.IBM.MHSC.NET, in my zone file. I do not understand where
this is different, regardless of whether registrar and registrant are the
same or not.
I am not sure that I like where this is going, but let's define the
territory anyway. I, of course, also ask the ever present question "how can
a registry perform such filtering and NOT be wide-open to litigation?"
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand
> Sent: Friday, November 26, 1999 1:55 PM
> To: Attyross@aol.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [wg-b] Famous Third-Level Domains
> At 12:24 26.11.99 -0500, Attyross@aol.com wrote:
> >A possible new issue has occurred to me that has not been
> >discussed much here. That is, how should famous third-level
> >domains be handled. Take, for example, the real site at:
> In most cases, this will be out of scope for ICANN, since
> this is clearly
> the responsibility of the administrator of beer.com.
> This was one of my first discussions in the WIPO comittee;
> making sure the
> docs said that they were only concerned with the domains where the
> registrar and the registrant were two different organizations.
> The exception is "functional" domains like co.uk.
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway