Jewsforjesus.org and registration requirements

["Martin B. Schwimmer" <martys@interport.net>]

At 12:06 PM 8/22/98 -0400, Mikki Barry wrote:

>Michael Brian Bentley wrote:
>
>> >The TM Interests want verification processes in domain names which are 
>> >to be used in commercial TLDs. 
>>  
>> Yeah. This is a challenge. A typical new domain name has no history of 
>> use to back it up. A typical defensible trademark has a history of use. 
>> Hm. Is one of the questions you ask the twelve year-old who wants to 
>> start her kids.delta domain to talk about growing up as a church-going 
>> kid whether she's going to sell air travel tickets or faucets? 
>
>

Ms. Barry wrote:
>And, of course, this would be a requirement that is not mandated in any
other 
>medium, as well as a prior restraint.


That is not correct.  In order to obtain a radio license or television
station license, the licensee has to submit extensive information and must
submit to various requirements (i.e. community service) in order to retain
the license (note how the spectrum allocation is a license and not a grant).

So two very important media require information from applicants for a
license (and that's not a prior restraint).

Speech is regulated all the time and it is not considered to be a prior
restraint - obscenity laws, hate speech, we cannot shout "fire" in a
crowded movie house and, as Steve Martin reminds us, we cannot shout
"movie" in a crowded fire house.

I have been advocating registration requirements for existing and proposed
commercial TLDs.  I don't think a convincing polcy argument can be made
that anyone has a right to do business anonymously and I cannot think of
examples other than in off-shore havens which allow the creation of legal
entitities (corporate names) and the registration of identifying indicia of
a company (trading names and trademarks) which do not require verifiable
identification information (and off-shore havens themselves usually want to
know who they are dealing with).

And the domain name of a commercially oriented web site serves to identify
a source of goods and service of the domain name owner.

So the twelve-year old girl would check a box that she wants
delta.[non-commercial tld], which she could sell to her friend named Delta,
but wouldn't sell to Delta Faucets (or a Delta Faucets competitor) because
it had no value as a business identifier.

As for the need for anonymous speech, this right would be protected by both
non-commercial TLDs and the ability to allows get a username from a ISP -
ooblick@aol.com or whatever.

Incidentally, you didn't respond to the question of how email from
brodsky@jewsforjesus.org is not false on its face.



MBS wrote:
 no one is served 
>> >if anonymous untraceable folk can set up domain names which allow them 
>> >to rip off amazon.com or junglee.com or whatever. 
>>  
MBentley wrote:
>> I think this needs a complaint department with a little bit of clout 
>> and the ability to resolve conflicts in a matter of hours. 
>
>
M. Barry:
>It's difficult to imagine that a registry would allow "untraceable" folk
to do 
>>much of anything since they would not be able to bill these "untraceable" 
>folk.  




The online gambling site or the counterfeiting ring would pay the registrar
for six months in advance, so the registrar would not care.  Then the site
runs it scheme and disappears, leaving only an imaginary P.O. Box behind.
That was not difficult to imagine.