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

RE: [wg-b] Re: [wg-c] telephone numbers in domain names.

Harald, extend that to its (unwelcome) possibilities ... having laid the tm
characteristic onto phone numbers, imagine trademark owners extending that
right to alpha versions of telephone numbers subscribed to others ...

I can too easily envision trademark owners UDRPing unsuspecting POTS line
subscribers in order to hijack all the alpha variations of their marks ...
its a stretch, but considering some of the UDRP interpretations and
rulings, I take nothing for granted.

> The telephone number space is the reality, and all spaces
> that mirror it,
> whether e164.com or e164.arpa, are its shadows

Maybe, maybe not ... folding numbers into the DNS creates a new hierarchy
... remember Richard Sharkey's warning ...

>Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 14:29:30 -0500
>To: e164-to-ip@l...
>From: Richard Shockey rshockey@i...
>Subject: Re: scope of the ENUM WB

...>...we have a whole pot load of other issues to deal with such as
>what is the effect of putting billions of numbers into the existing
>DNS system? Security, authorization, number ownership and control.
>I won't even try to comment the Layer 10 issues of the ITU, ESTI,
>EMA/VPIM etc.


Judith Oppenheimer, 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert
Publisher, http://www.ICBTollFreeNews.com
President, http://www.1800TheExpert.com
FREE 800/Domain Classifieds, http://ICBclassifieds.com
Domain Name & 800 News, Intelligence, Analysis

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harald Alvestrand [mailto:Harald@Alvestrand.no]
> Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2000 8:44 AM
> To: Judith Oppenheimer; wg-c@dnso.org
> Cc: wg-b@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [wg-b] Re: [wg-c] telephone numbers in domain names.
> At 09:26 24/11/2000 -0500, Judith Oppenheimer wrote:
> >Actually, I did have a problem with the business model re
> its policy plans:
> >
> >         "iTAB seeks authority from ICANN ... over the core
> policies that
> > define
> >the utilization of ".tel" as a shared resource for bridging
> the addressing
> >gap between legacy telephone numbers and emerging standards of the
> >Internet-Telephony industry."
> >
> >         "Following the current practice with all Internet top-level
> > domains, the
> >registration of E.164 numbers in the DLS will be managed by a single
> >trusted "Registry". It is assumed that this exclusive
> Registry function
> >will fall under the regulatory control of ICANN."
> I had problems with this plan too, but perhaps in a different
> sense than you.
> I believe that letting customers claim rights to a number in
> e164.com when
> they have lost all rights to the same number in the real
> telephone number
> space will lead to much confusion and no gain.
> The telephone number space is the reality, and all spaces
> that mirror it,
> whether e164.com or e164.arpa, are its shadows (to misuse
> Platon's imagery).
> Having shadows that linger when the reality is gone benefits nobody.
> But I believe Pulver knows what it's getting into, and its failure to
> maintain its shadows properly in e164.com will be a matter
> between them and
> their customers, not a problem for the Internet as a whole.
> Therefore, I may be concerned, but not worried.
> IMHO, of course.
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, alvestrand@cisco.com
> +47 41 44 29 94
> Personal email: Harald@Alvestrand.no