Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] WT-2 who/what

[Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>]

Andrew,

There are several studies that show defensive trademark registrations in new 
TLDs will be minimal.  I'm happy to share these studies if needed.   The 
overwhelming majority of trademarks are not registered across existing TLDs - 
so they will not be uniformly registered in niche TLDs like .SAMI

Having run the registries for multiple TLDs I can tell you that any applicant 
who thinks they will have a viable business from just trademark defense is 
seriously misguided.

Due to many factors,  including the extensive trademark protections in the DAG, 
 defensive registrations will, at best,  be a break-even business for new 
registries.

So ----  we don't need to worry about gaming on that issue.

RT


On May 24, 2010, at 10:29 AM, Andrew Mack wrote:

> To Richard and Elaine's points, what can I say.  I agree.  Especially think 
> the point about the use of mobile devices is a good one.
> 
> The idea of setting a floor was to create some sort of minimum number for 
> financial viability, but especially if we're using alternative back-end 
> models (e.g. pooling resources for smaller applicants, standardization) + 
> some sort of assistance, I think it would be hard to say what a floor number 
> is.
> 
> That said, I'm not that familiar with .ki, but the idea of $1000/domain 
> strikes me as pretty steep.  Who buys the .ki's?  I know there are some 
> concerns about a rush of new gTLDs creating a need for indefinite defensive 
> registries (e.g. cocacola.new-gTLD).  Would our group see this as a kind of 
> gaming as well?  
> 
> Perhaps this won't be an issue, but if we're planning to subsidize/support 
> (temporarily) needy applicants, I'd want to make sure the benefit was 
> captured by the community first and foremost.
> 
>  
> Andrew A. Mack
> Principal
> AMGlobal Consulting
> +1-202-256-1077 
> amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> www.amglobal.com
> 
> 
> From: Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>
> To: soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Mon, May 24, 2010 12:34:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] WT-2 who/what
> 
> i agree that a minimum number of eligible community members will be hard to 
> define,  and may not be relevant.
> 
> RT
> 
> 
> On May 24, 2010, at 9:25 AM, Elaine Pruis wrote:
> 
>> The question "-Is it ok if the applicant only serves a very small part of 
>> the public?" was posed and the responses so far:
>> 
>> Andrew:  The answer depends on what we might describe as “very small”. 
>> Denmark is small in population but has a relatively larger footprint on the 
>> web than the Hausa community which is much larger in terms of population.  
>> Absent a very compelling reason to carve out a specific small TLD (and an 
>> organizational structure to support it), for viability I agree that there 
>> would need to be some sort of “floor” number of say, arbitrarily 500,000 
>> community members, before an application is considered.  (This is not a 
>> proposed number, just a guess). 
>>  
>>> Avri: One data-point on community size.
>>> 
>>> I have been working on infrastructure projects for the last 10 with the 
>>> Sámi people years who are an indigenous semi-nomadic population that lives 
>>> in the northern most regions of Norway, Sweden, Finland and the Kola 
>>> Peninsula in Russia.  
>>> 
>>> This community is estimated at 80,000 - 135,000.  I always assumed that 
>>> they were a large enough 'community' to apply for a TLD.  I think they 
>>> assumed that as well.
>> 
>> Andrew: To the second (implied) part of the question, what is the public?  
>> If nearly the only people interested in the TLD are its members, is that OK? 
>>  I would argue yes, since the community building function is a positive good 
>> in most cases, even though the “general public” might not care much about 
>> Hausa literature for example.
>> 
>> After some thought it seems to me that we should not require a floor nor a 
>> minimum projection of registrations in our criteria. For example, ,  .ki 
>> ccTLD has less than 1k registrations, yet it serves the 96,558 people of its 
>> community, Kiribati, and is commercially viable (at $1k/domain).
>> 
>> Another reason is that we are seeing significant growth of mobile users in 
>> 'developing countries'.  Even if there is limited projected demand for 
>> domain name registrations today, by 2012 when new TLDs are launched, entire 
>> populations could be using domains through mobile technology,  leapfrogging 
>> the required infrastructure for 'traditional' domain usage.
>> 
>> Elaine Pruis
>> VP Client Services
>> elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> +1 509 899 3161
>> 
> 
>