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

RE: [wg-c] Re: IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs




> From: owner-wg-c@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-c@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Kent
> Crispin
> Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 2:30 PM
> To: wg-c@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-c] Re: IP/TM Concerns & New GTLDs
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 02, 1999 at 12:29:25PM -0700, Mark C. Langston wrote:
> >
> > On 2 August 1999, "Kevin J. Connolly" <CONNOLLK@rspab.com> wrote:
> >
> > [...snip]
> >
> > > Nope.  I am reminded of Frederick the Great's aphorism:
> who tries to
> > >defend e verything ends by defending nothing.  Simile, who tries to
> > >insert a large number of gTLD s into the root zone ends up locking
> > >the world into the existing three for ANOTHER 30 months.
> >
> > Kevin, this is one of the things that bothers me.  You work from an
> > assumption that no matter what is proposed, no matter how reasonable
> > we may be, no matter how much everyone bends over backwards in an
> > attempt to accomodate,
>
> Tossing in 100 new gTLDs is hardly "bending over backward" to
> accomodate the concerns of TM interests.

Actually doing 100 new TLDs is not exactly feasible...too expensive. It
won't happen without very large funding. Even one, is expensive. It is
therefore a rathole. Go ahead, give in, your worst fears will never be
realized. Remember, the present market size is only $90M. At most, I can
see two registries getting funded. Maybe, three but one will be
reabsorbed later.

Don't you see the problem is the declaration of the limits and not the
limits themselves? Let the marketplace set the limits. The TM interests
don't see this either, or they would also stop complaining. But, lawyers
are no better at running business than engineers are.

You are actually being obstructive on the basis of a
non-existant/non-practical/non-workable case. It simply can not,
financially, happen. If you disagree, show me a real financial model
that reduces the start-up costs by 75% over what I have stated (Don't
forget the $15-20 million needed for marketing.) and I might actually
back it.