Dear Friedrich:If the world were only that simple. Please look at my subject
line above -- it's self-explanatory.
I'm not suggesting that the role of ICANN
be expanded to arbitrate in the trademark business, as there is currently established
jurisdictions to administer such an area. On the other hand, an innovative
approach may include that the existing duly created Trademark public agencies work
in a coordinated manner with ICANN, and/or the Registries to seamlessly address this
very real issue. Of course, this seamless coordinated effort will require substantial
energy and resources from all involved.
Consequently, who should assume
such a responsibility and do we, the people, want this? If yes, this may be
a very popular topic in the current political, private and public environments. If
not, then the timing will have to give way to the desires and the ripenning of the
issues. To just put all these things, de facto, in the hands of ICANN to solve,
as if the .REG were the silver bullet, certainly denies the roles of our institutions
and the processes we the people use to reach decisions on things that matter to us,
be it domestically (locally, Statewide, nation-wide) and/or internationally (globally).
In any event, let's be cognizant that the issues are complex and the answers can
not always be found at a single place, or with a single player, or with a single
step. I love what our forefathers and what our institutions represent and I
have full confidence that the system works most of the time in the best interest
of the public good. Therefore, let's face the issues fairly and squarely, and
let's start thinking about letting the established bodies whose purview it is to
attend this issues get duly engaged. Let's not shift responsibilities or wish
that apples can be dealt with in the same ways that oranges can. Let's do things
right and let's frame them right.
Very Truly Yours,
Nestor Requeno
Los Angeles,
County of Los Angeles, California USA