ICANN should not be in the business of evaluating strings, period. It should publish technical criteria and minimally evaluate whether a registry fulfills those. Some trademark holders will argue against new TLDs, but then they'd also argue against learning new languages, lest they have to "police" their marks in those too. --Wendy At 04:16 AM 1/30/2007, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
Just pushing the issue again - if we want to be heard on this, we need to come up with a statement in a not too long timeframe, definitely before Lisbon.
Specifically:
Bret Fausett ha scritto:
On the money printing machine argument, this is an argument in favor of no new generic TLDs at all. I don't see it as unique to .XXX.
No, the point is that if you had a TLD that is useful to someone (as any other TLD that was created, basically), then defensive registrations would be a price that we collectively have to pay to get more names available out there. But if the TLD is not wanted by its own community (and it seems unlikely that adult webmasters are actually going to move into it, just to be filtered out more easily), then what you're left with is a TLD that more or less only contains defensive registrations and pay-per-click sites, and that is a nonsense to me.
OTOH, I think that defensive registrations are a silly method to protect one's brand, as it doesn't scale, and moreover it helps create scarcity of good names - so it's time that ICANN discourages it and ensures that there are effective methods to act ex post, rather than being concerned about how to help it. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <--------
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/