Some Trademark industry views are very amusing ...
I find it interesting that the trademark community opposes introduction of new TLDs. I believe their view conveniently ignores the history of the .COM ?brand? and typo squatting, and trademark confusion, that primarily takes place under the .COM Brand. Allowing brands to remove / detach themselves from .COM actually reduces trademark problems by reducing and eventually eliminating consumers current view that brands are found ?under? .com. In effect a corp obtaining their ?.Brand? faces some costs to move customers to their own TLDs but at the same time, and by many corps doing this, consumers will no longer look to .COM for individual brands they will instead try say ?www.Cars.Ford? first. Once enough brands breakout to their own TLDs consumers will intuitive know that unless the TLD is equal to the brand they are not at the trademark holders ?authorized? site. That having been said, I do understand how corporations related to paid search and ISPs would not like new brand oriented TLDs as doing so cuts into their own virtual typo squatting such as Internet Explorer?s redirection of unzoned (read: typos) URL entries to their paid search. Also note that ISP are now placing bandwidth limits on their services to prevent competing service offerings such as third party internet video on demand ..... Just imagine the lawsuit of a .NFL finding that Comcast is blocking their video feed due to ?bandwidth limits?. It?s hard to make such cases with most domains are mixed under a single primary TLD, but beak out TLD by brand and the issue of Network Neutralty become all too obvious ... Not to mention the lawsuit of Ford going after Microsoft for it monitizing .FORD ?error traffic? via Internet Explorer, or ISP doing the same with their recent introduction of monitization systems within their networks. I suggest *SOME* trademark holders lack of support for expasion of TLDs is *VERY* self serving .... Espicially those in any way benefit from error traffic monitization as well as those who benefit from *NOT* having a Neutral Network. To be clear I fully support an expansion of TLD subject to equal cost of registration and renewal for all registrants of "retial" TLDs to avoid the registry from *EXTORTING* businesses, as well as full accountablity of ICANN for it's profits of such TLDs. Private / Brand TLD obviously have now such registrant cost and such be very carfully issues and *NOT* allowed to ever be sold, they should follow full "delete cycle" as if they never existed. - Charles Christopher