WT writes:>That's correct. I would be out of line
to yell and scream if things were to sour for IOD. I knew the risks, as you say.
However, if IOD is approved, its registrants just can't be cut loose, in all fairness,
and by backing of law, I would imagine.<
When I made the statement that IOD's .web
should be included, I meant their existing registrants as well. And I should have
said that my 'no interest' disclaimer applies to IOD as well.
>...and those registrants
were rightfully grandfathered in. It seems a fair and decent policy, and not one
that should be abandoned in the case of IOD, or some other registry down the line.<
Whoa
there. In the case of IOD I agree, but not one down the line. Well, unless it is
clear from the get-go that it is entirely speculative, even then I think it's probably
a bad idea, otherwise we'll have speculators squatting on and/or pre-selling every
conceivable .whatever. You missed your dotcom name, no problem, get yer own TLD right
here. Ick! Pre-registration, while perhaps one partial solution to having new registrars'
servers turned into smoking holes on opening day, shouldn't be acceptable in future.
.web is a special case as I said. Let's not go there again.
Regarding the trademark
question, Image Online Design is listed with the US PTO only as having a service
mark on a .web design, not as a trademarked .web TLD.