Re: [wg-review] [DNDEF]

[Eric Dierker <ERIC@HI-TEK.COM>]

I vehemently disagree and here are some of the reasons why;
I register eric.com, I then work very hard to build a Web portal with a great revenue
stream using eric.com.  Along comes retirement age, Mr. Megabucks says "Mr. eric I don't
like your site but I love the branding and marketing of eric.com".  He then offers me one
gazillion $s for my domain name.  Now you tell me I CANN'T sell my rights to eric.com for
more than the registration fee.

A non-representative monopolistic quasi-governmental corporation that spends more on
lawyers than translations is one thing.  Giving it more power over e-commerce is another.

As far as intent goes, the intentions of contributors to ICANN, DNSO administration is
transparently in favor of giving registrars more control over making more money, yet I do
not hear that as grounds to take away their rights.

If your statement was not made 100% on behalf of the registrars constituency then I
suggest someone has been severely manipulated.

Sincerely,

Derek Conant wrote:

> My suggestion regarding the subject matter is that ICANN Accredited Registrars should
> be the only ones authorized to sell or resell (or register) domain names (.com, .net,
> .org and new gTLDs).  This may solve a lot of the problems being discussed here
> regarding auctions and trade names and trademarks.  Domain names should not be
> auctioned and/or resold for more than the average registration costs.  To auction a
> domain name appears to be by its very nature a bad faith contributor to the trade
> name and/or trademark infringement argument.
>
> ICANN Accredited Registrars are far easier to control than non-ICANN Accredited
> Registrars.  There are so many ICANN Accredited Registrars now, it will do good to
> limit domain name registrations to only ICANN Accredited Registrars. Maybe there
> should be no reselling or auctioning of domain names?  A registrant uses the domain
> name or shows intended use or else the domain name is released back to the public
> domain and available for registration through any ICANN Accredited Registrar.
>
> Sotiropoulos wrote:
>
> > 1/19/01 3:37:25 PM, "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@aim.be> wrote:
> >
> > >My suggestion for a common point of agreement stands:
> > >"what is important is the intent of the domain name holder. Are they in good
> > >faith or bad faith? Do they seek fair DNS presence or do they seek to
> > >pretend to be what they are not?"
> >
> > What about in cases of a trademark on a generic term, and a domain
> > registration of said generic term, where the registrant of the domain puts it up
> > for auction to the first bidder that meets their price threshold?   Is this "good
> > faith" or "bad faith"?  As I pointed out in an earlier post, the terms "flu" and
> > "headache" are trademarked, and not by P&G.  Is it ok for P&G to engage in
> > selling such domains in an after market situation?
> >
> >
> > Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >           Hermes Network, Inc.
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
begin:vcard 
n:Dierker;Eric
tel;fax:(858) 571-8497
tel;work:(858) 571-8431
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:Eric@Hi-Tek.com
end:vcard