IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs (was:Re: [wg-c] Who should vote fornew gTLDs)

["Kevin J. Connolly" <CONNOLLK@rspab.com>]

The problems of new GTLDs go far beyond any dispute resolution policy.

Trademark holders are already concerned with the large and growing number 
of places where domain names can be registered.  Their concern is magnified 
by the emergence of ccTLDs whose names make it possible for SLDs in those 
domains to be perceived as more than just geographically linked.  In the 
emergence of TLDs such as .io, .cc, .to.,  and .nu, the trademark community 
sees a precursor of what could happen if the growth of the TLD name space 
is not curtailed.

It is already more expensive to browse the namespace under .com, .net and 
.org for potential clashes than it is to peruse the trademark space for the United 
States, Canada, Mexico, Japan and Europe combined.  This much has been 
known since September 1996, when a number of trademark organizations 
implored CORE's kickoff meeting to do something to control the cost of 
protecting trademarks on the Internet.  The ADR system is not a solution 
to these problems; developing a solution will require the development of robust 
protocols with a coherent (ideally, uniform) interface for perusing the registered 
names and a reliable method for ascertaining by whom names have been registered 
and for what purposes.

This cannot be done in an environment where the root is opened to as many 
domain names as there are registry operators, each with its own protocols, privacy 
policies, and dispute resolution policies and procedures.  It is certainly beau geste 
to propose a domain name policy for ICANN against which the international trademark 
community is certain to fight.  The legitimate concerns of trademark holders have already 
delayed and complicated the process to date.  No policy for expanding the TLD name 
space which ignores the interests of the trademark community is likely ever to see the 
light of day.

Whatever we recommend to the NC and ICANN, we are wasting our time if we do 
not take steps to preserve legitimate trademark interests.  As indicated, the ADR 
system is a necessary but not sufficient step to doing so.  Another inevitable step is 
a go slow approach.  Only a few TLDs can be added to the root in the first stage 
(even seven is probably too high a number; three is more likely to win over the TM 
community).  What's especially important is that ICANN engage the international 
trademark community in meaningful dialogue so as to remove the community's fears 
that the propellor beanie set do not understand the IP concerns, or do not care to 
address them.

KJC

**********************************************************************
The information contained in this electronic message is confidential
and is or may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work
product doctrine, joint defense privileges, trade secret protections,
and/or other applicable protections from disclosure.  If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this com-
munication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communi-
cation in error, please immediately notify us by calling our Help Desk
at 212-541-2000 ext.3314, or by e-mail to helpdesk@rspab.com
**********************************************************************