Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: Garry Anderson
Date/Time: Sun, April 22, 2001 at 7:55 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Subject: ICANN suppress freedom of speech again?


Several of my postings have been deleted. They were relevant to this forum. If it was ICANN, not being fans of the First Amendment or open and transparent processes, they are obviously continuing normal practices.

I was pursuing the reason as to why a new TLD was not introduced, to solve the ***most important problems*** on the DNS - including ‘trademark infringement’ and ‘consumer confusion’.

The authorities certainly know that class, country and identifier are mandatory requirements for this.

I suggested, for identifier, using the new TLD ‘.REG’.

Logically, there can be only two reasons why they have not done this - stupidity or corruption.

In my true considered and informed opinion, the authorities must be corrupt not to want this solved.

The following is one of my deleted postings, in response to anothers message.

In it, I give the basis of why this should have been a new TLD and part my rationale to coming to this conclusive opinion. Also, example of my reasoning skills - so that critics could not pass me off as somebody of low intelligence.

They deleted this one, I presume, because they object to me explaining why I believe them corrupt.

I must have explained too well.;3ADEC6D5000000EB

Subject: Why ICANN is CORRUPT

Politicians do more spinning of truth - why I did Analysis of Spin on my site. Spin is worse than a lie - it gives the lie credibility.

And before you get funny - skilful is the proper English spelling of the word. After many millions of domains had gone, I just used logic to find it. I mention this only to prove my logical ability.

Please explain: "As for expense, .org, would serve the same purpose as .reg without the high rates of .com."

>there will probably always be more CC-TLD's than G-TLD's (at least for the foreseeable future).

Millions of gTLDs are being sat on by ICANN. They are the worlds greatest cybersquatters. What sort of world would it be if we only had two hundred or so towns - each allowed only one High Street (Americans may call it Main Street)?

>Therefore, a company protecting its marks in all cc-TLD's would pay more than in all G-TLD's existing and approved or likely to be approved in the foreseeable future.


You are talking silly - most trademarks all share similar names. How can they say it is THEIR name - when it belongs to others?

IT HAS TO BE UNIQUE - A trademark is declared invalid through a lack of distinctiveness.

To use Attorneys words, "The basic tenet of trademark law is to protect consumers and trademark owners from confusion in the marketplace".

It is trademarks 'raison d'ętre' - reason for existance.

From this you may come to the same conclusion as me - The authorities do not care about trademark law - just about power and money.

Ask yourself - on the balance of probability, given all their expertise and great resources. Are they imbeciles or they are corrupt?


(and WIPO / USPTO / DoC)

Signed Garry Anderson -


Message Thread:

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy