410 writes:>This
is not a case of non-differentiation. This is a case of meaninglessness.<
Which
is what com/net/org have largely become. They are interchangeable. Along with numerous
ccTLDs.
>This goes against the intention of opening new TLDs in the first place,
and you would be protected by the domain's generic status.<
Not so. Many generic
domains have been transferred via court actions and UDRP.
>However, have you seen
a lawsuit between Business.net and Business.com? It wouldn't stick.<
Business.net
is a redirect to minn.net. Presumably they may have had it before business.com changed
hands. And presumably they may be large enough that business.com will leave them
alone. OTOH, it isn't impossible that one could file against the other in court and/or
the UDRP.
>The city has regions devoted to commerce because in commerce, people
naturally come together--and the structure of society and urbanization fall naturally
into place.<
>The Internet is different. It is non-localized. So the city zones
you speak of are not only non-restrictive--the forces that give rise to them non-existent
in the Online World.<
I disagree somewhat. A city is first built perhaps near a
river, later it shifts somewhat because of a new railroad, later still because of
a superhighway. The commercial, residential and other areas move about in relation
to changes, often technological ones that couldn't be pre-planned for.
We didn't
foresee cybersquatting, we didn't foresee registering by scripts, we didn't foresee
the trademark problem, we didn't foresee the blending of com/net/org/ccTLDs, we didn't
foresee online porn (well, I did but no one would listen). :)
The TLDs were created,
some with explicit restrictions gov/mil/edu, some on the honor system com/net/org.
The restricted domains don't seem to be a problem. There is no cybersquatting, no
UDRP decisions, they seem to gatekeep without great cost, and their restrictions
don't inconvenience me or presumably almost everyone else. So if we are to change
the internet space because of unforeseens, we should look to what presently works
and what doesn't.
>Of course they are. .banc are for established financial institutions,
and .unions are for. . . well, UNIONS. That is specialization.<
And what is inherently
wrong with that? I have never seen any good arguments given against it, either for
technical or other reasons.
>But I think these would probably restricted like .gov
and .edu are.<
That was what I was suggesting. Though I think each group should
be left to come up with their own restrictions. I suspect that some would be more
restrictive than others, and we could learn from that for subsequent rTLDs. To continue
the city analogy I also think we need a commons, open areas, whatever. We already
have com/net/org/various ccTLDs for that. But sure, create a few more open areas.
There's nothing technically or financially unsound about that so far as I can see.