[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-c] Retraction of previous proposal
1. Why ask this of IP lawyers and not every one else on this list?
2. Why is accomodation of other's parties' interests (characterized by you
as a "concession") limited by a "merely"?
3. The positive value of new TLDs, if they use suffixes which distinguish
them from other TLDs (in a way in which .firm does not distinguish itself
from .com), and the registrars adopt best practices such as prepayment and
verifiable contact data, and the TLD is subject to expedited dispute
resolution, then those new gTLDs will expand the name space in a way which
will increase and enhance the ability to use DNs, and increase the ability
of consumers to rely on brands and trading names in e-commerce, and widen
the name space to prevent unintentional conflict between commercial and
At 04:58 PM 7/30/99 -0400, you wrote:
>I would like to hear from Rita and other IP lawyers on the list why they
think any new gTLDs should be added. Is it merely a concession to the
demands from other interests, or do you see any positive value in adding
new TLDs? If you do see a value, what is it?
>Rita M. Odin wrote:
>> I am not arguing against *any expansion,* I am merely attempting to
explain the issues with which IP owners are confronted and why they think
it is necessary to take a slow, measured approach to adding gTLDs.
Perhaps, in light of the recent discussion (and your proposed solution
below), you can see why it matters whether 1 or 100 new gTLDs are added?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @