I must agree with the dot tv corporation, this is unacceptable, with regards to the
action on the reconsideration requests taking so long, Although Image Online Design
has been waiting not just 11 weeks for approval, try 5 years!!!! What does
it take? An act of congress??
We understand that you have the "contract"
to supervise the technical aspects of the internet. It is mightily apparent
that (you) ICANN have interpreted the contract to mean that you can disregard your
own bylaws (for whatever the purposes, that is NOT the point.)
I have just a couple
of points to make about the Sunrise Proposal and competition.
The sunrise is contrary to existing trademark law. A process which circumvents
the entire trademark protection process in the US and other countries, specifically
is not viable and most certainly would be challenged in the courts (which court is
another issue, ie. Sovereignty). The sunrise would actually dilute the effectiveness
of a trademark as it would be assigning rights before they are even challenged....Think
In the US it is up to the TRADEMARK holder to police their marks....Not
ICANN, and certainly not the registeries which up to this point have been protected
from lawsuits (NSI and the dot sex case).
Why did the framers of our laws set
it up so that the TM owner would have to police their own marks: To prevent
the very dilema that your about to embark on, which is implying automatic rights
(making it EASY) for someone with a piece of paper and a stamp on it to claim absolute
use. TM protection is much more than that...For one thing, a TM owner must
use the mark for it to be in force (who is going to police that...), Secondly who
is to say, one TM owner in one class has anymore rights than another....That is why
they set up the class system...Only what your doing (if the Sunrise goes through,
is COME AND GET IT...Again, the paper alone doesn't mean anything)
If the sunrise
were implemented (which I do not believe had consensus...I really don't) the lawsuits
from TM owners in different classes of goods and services would entirely defeat any
benefit the Sunrise would give TM owners...See the trick here is if you create a
special situation, rather then first come, first serve....You invite trouble...
one very last thing...The Sunrise clearly represents a "policy" decision. Has nothing
to do with the technical management of the DNS (that is for the courts) Clearly
from Vint Cerf's testimony ICANN (and rightfully so) would stay out of the policy
making business. I respect Dr. Cerf and take him at his word on it.
COMPETITION: Wasn't it Jon Postel who postulated the idea that to have a healthy,
robust internet, there must be competition. The companies that will be responsible
for the new unrestricted TLDs DO NOT represent new competition. What it represents,
is existing companies, no matter what you call them, taking all the fish, and leaving
no scraps behind. The market is turning on them because of their lack of service.
I ask: What will be any different???
3) Do not double up on TLD's
(dot biz)...If there was a time to forget monetary pressures, this is the time to
do it. ORSC isn't going anywhere, and if they continue to grow at the pace
they are going, well....The decision you make in 2001 (and it appears your steamrolling
ahead) will appear very foolish. Does the Y2K problem ring a bell?? Different
type problem, but one that could have been avoided. Double "biz" is not a way
to promote a health internet (which is comprised of many systems, not just the "A"
root). Point here...Think about it.
4) Last point I want to mention about
the TLD's....Obviously Image Online Design supporters aren't going anywhere.
You could say that I am a "board squatter" too. The reason for this, and I
hope we do it with civility and dialogue, is all that we ask if for a chance...The
market will either prove you right or wrong. I bet on IOD, and it's innovative
registry system, and TM protection system they have. Think about it.