non protected TM.x.com vs. protected TM.xxx

[JFCM <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I am not sure I understand the TM protection scheme.
Did ICANN check no single letter TMs are protected.

I undestood that TM could only be protected at second level?
Since I suppose that "x.com" will be used as a substitute for ".xxx" 
will we get a "coca-cola.x.com" porn site?
Or will Coca-Cola have to buy 2304 3LDs to protect its name?
- all the coca-cola.0.aero to coca-cola.z.travel
- and xn--coca-cola.0.aero to xn--coca-cola.z.travel
- all the cocacola.0.aero to cocacola.z.travel
- and xn--cocacola.0.aero to xn--cocacola.z.travel

I am not sure how this simplifies the life of the users. But I am 
sure lawyers will enjoy battle between ibm.l.com and ibm.1.com and 
IBM.I.com registrants. I am sure alt-roots never conceived such a 
nasty scheme to show where making the DNS business may lead to.
I suggest that first we start with "o.com" and "0.com" for an initial 
six month test. Then that we run a review by an external expert.
jfc