[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: =?windows-1252?q?Dominio=Èco=85_Aporte_DE_ACUI _ = =?windows-1252?q?a_la_lista=È = From: jmamodio@gmail.com It does not have of which Andres, aqui goes then what motivatesand bases my it asks Daniel. Continuing a little with the cuestionamiento that proponia Alexander in answer to the message of Antonio, evidently one of the points but urticantes for some, are the similarity from CO with COM that certainly but alla that the Government of Colombia after a process that can or to be criticized has not decided to contract the administration of same to a commercial company, it generates an interesting situation in present universe of the dominion names. Lamentably, my opinion, the DNS has become a luck of Persian market, but that has given rise to a "estimated industry" in several trillions of dolares, to be generated many interests then and all want a small piece of the "cake". In my opinion the bottom question is that with the similarity between CO and COM is created a new space where certain reglas/politicas preexisting they fall in a gray land and the door is opened sothat potentially greater surely greater competition is created and controversy in the use of the DNS. A detail in individual to consider, is that although CO ccTLD comprises of ccNSO, CO is one of ccTLD that does not even have signed algun formal agreement or "accountability framework" with ICANN, nonmemory at this moment with exactitude if one has occurred in the past algun "to letter exchange". Then in this frame, and although they exist certain norms and processes that all have accepted in common and derivatives of the delegation of the administration of ccTLD on the part of IANA in the frame of the expressed thing in the RFC1591, we say that CO becomes then in "new COM" with a "regulatory frame" slightly different from which operates COM at the moment. (It is possible to notice that TV ccTLD it has not signed a formal agreement with ICANN either). Also it is possible to emphasize that in spite of not existing a formal agreement, in certain subjects as the resolution of disputes CO ccTLD has decided to follow the same process established by ICANN (UDRP) and in relation a protection of marks to create a period "sunrise". Some companies have not hoped too much to move, already can to visit http://www.microsoft.co /, that although the period of "sunrise" began 1ro of April already was registered from February 24, 2010. Other dominions like apple.co and google.co also they are or registered, peculiarly in the same date or a day antes/despues, is to say that preference has occurred him certain names previous at the beginning of the period "sunrise", possibly this surga of the Phase 1 or period of "apadrinamiento" where that already they counted on a dominion of third low level com.co, edu.co, etc, they could apply for a dominion of second level, but the detail is that this peridio comenzo 1ro of March, then as it is that Microsoft registry its dominion MICROSOFT.CO in February? (Part of the information on these periodos/procesos is in the titled document "CO Report Summarized for Holders of Marksand its Agents "http://www.cointernet.com.co/sites/default/files/documents/CO_propiedad_inte...). Then returning to my initial question, that is what it is wanted "to avoid that he happens", under which "mandate", and on the part of who? Kind Greetings Jorge Co cctld member of ccnso _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/e1c9137114.html --]]