Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: Garry Anderson
Date/Time: Sat, August 18, 2001 at 8:54 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Subject: Pardon

Message:
 

 
I have studied Internet (mis)Management for nearly two years.

I have put the answer to Internet trademark problems to US and UK Government departments. It has never been successfully challenged, by anybody. The USPTO and DoC, also UK Patent Office, could not deny this solution would unique identify all trademarks.

I will happily bow to those that could disprove me.

My observations and opinions:

You say: "There have been a number of comments that have suggested the Dot Info and Dot Biz process have been a conspiracy or a swindle."

Given that the chosen planned route has provided greatest profit, on the balance of probability, it seems the most likely reason.

I do not agree with having Sunrise Period, it is a propaganda solution. A THOUSAND new open TLD, each with sunrise, will not solve the problems.

Giving trademarks priority in open TLD, abridges peoples use of these words.

I am for restricted trademark TLDs - it is the only logical solution to avoid 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' problems and to stop anybody 'passing off'.

The only fair process for Sunrise Period would be:

Open Sunrise. Domain goes to trademark first come, first served basis. Timestamp other claims, in case first is fraudulant. Released to first, only upon verfification.

Open Landrush - people now know what domains are available. Domain goes on first come, first served basis.

You say: "I must admit that some decisions have raised my eyebrow but I do still believe at this point that most of the decisions made so far have been in good faith."

Given the past performance over the years and the closed meetings, it would seem you are wrong.

You say: "Both of the processes for the new TLD's have been trials.  There is no precedent for what ICANN and Afilias & Nuelevel are attempting to do.  In fact, ICANN has been clear that both procedures are trials and that future TLD offerings will be based on what is learned."

Please read 410 excellent post:
http://forum.icann.org/cgi-bin/rpgmessage.cgi?newtldagmts;3B7B8B9D0000044B

You say: "It is clear that the international credibility of each of these entities is on trial during this process."

I am convinced - they either could not plan a piss-up in a brewery or they are corrupt. I go with second option.

You say: "It is in the best interest of all involved that the process is fair and credible."

The only thing that seems in their best interest - to make most profit from the situation.

They have been 100% successful.
 

Link: WIPO.org.uk


Message Thread: