Re: [wg-c] straw poll -- reminder

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@ebarn.com>]

I think it's important to recognize the difference between squatting and
speculation. In my mind, speculation is an indication of a healthy market
that, while it should not be encouraged, should not be specifically
disallowed or banned. If a company or an individual decides that it wants to
attempt to corner the world market for generic real estate domains - the
more power to them. Squatting on the other hand is a clear abuse of existing
IP law and needs to be dealt with as such.

To come down on someone because they want to sell drugs.com for $1mm is not
the way we should be going with this issue.

-RWR
----- Original Message -----
From: Elisabeth PORTENEUVE <Elisabeth.PORTENEUVE@cetp.ipsl.fr>
To: <wg-c@dnso.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: [wg-c] straw poll -- reminder


> I share reservations about a gTLD vote expressed here.
>
> I wish add that as far as gTLDs are concerned I see only
> TM/IP concerns sometimes addressed. This is utmostly reducing.
> The TM/IP community discovered that a wild registration
> of Internet names in .com/.org/.net made a tremendous treatens
> to worldwide economy (which economy is also a base of our
> life), and had enough forces to bring governments attention
> to that.
>
> But there is another problem with wild registration
> of Internet names in .com/.org/.net (or in any other gTLD).
>
> All geographical and historical names (English and French alike,
> probably other languages) are registered, then all English
> dictionnary names are registrered. Automated systems
> associated with dictionnaries on line (or on CDROM) make
> Internet domain name registration for some middlemen-cybersquatters
> just yet another fast speculation activity.
> Last June some newspapers reported about a company who succeded
> to register ALL not-yet-taken 4 letters. In San Jose the pannel
> of people discussing about Internet evolution for the next
> year (Vint Cerf and others), concluded that in 2000
> many if not all of two-words combinations in English will
> be registered as domain names.
>
> Whereas business and trademark community had some means
> and money to fight with cybersquatters, the ordinary people,
> and public institutions from all the world discover
> with astonishment that they were stolen their national names.
> Those people are treatened by dilution and misuse of their
> cultural ressources, and they do not have the business
> approach to go to courts, they do not have public taxes
> to be spent fighting for their legitimate names abused by
> entrepreneurs.
>
> Many discussions about rules for .com/.org/.net or gTLDs
> stress out difficulties if not impossibilities
> on the international level to have some law reinforced.
> As the humanity did not succeed yet to have the same
> culture, the same taste, the same behaviour on the Earth
> -- it may happen that it takes some time, no necessary
> to increase a number of gTLDs and add difficulties.
>
> In many situation after some new discoveries were
> implemented, then spread worldwide, the question of pollution
> or health diseases or similar arises, and regulatory work
> is necessary to preserve public order.
> Sometimes a compromise is reached, sometimes not,
> it happen also that a terrorism arrises.
>
> Is it too pessimistic ?
>
> Elisabeth Porteneuve
>
> NB. I do not take an answer one of you gave me about .us.
>     If a US federal agency in charge of .us sent a call for
>     tender for the management of brand STLDs under .us
>     (such as .law.us), I am absolutely convinced that many
>     US compagnies will compete for it, because there is a profit.