Re: [alac] Fwd: [gtld-com] Draft final report (v4)

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2003-05-10 16:10:19 +0200, Vittorio Bertola wrote:

> I think that these are very high-level principles, so much
> depends on how you implement them.

They are fine as high-level principles which everybody should strive
to achieve -- but they are not at all fine as criteria which are to
be judged in an evaluation process.  This point should be made
crystal clear.

> I understand that #7 means "since .com exists, ICANN should not
> allow to create .X as a separate gTLD by another
> registry/sponsor, if X is or can be confused with the Japanese,
> Chinese, Korean... ideogram for commercial";

If that's really meant, then we should oppose it.

> and #8 means "if the registry/sponsor for .com asks to create .X
> too, .X should follow the same policies as .com".

To give a non-IDN example which in fact covers both situations, we
already have .com and .biz, which are quite similar in meaning, but
quite different in terms of policies.  The world has not come to an
end.

Why should ICANN suddenly start to add restrictions which would only
have the effect to give incumbent registry operators preferred
access to new gTLDs, and which would badly affect competition?  

(I can see good reasons for this kind of policy from the point of
view of an incumbent registry operator.  But *only* from that point
of view.)

Regards,
-- 
Thomas Roessler                        <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>