First, it does not appear highly questionable. ICANN's staff report drives home two
key points. First, that their criticism was one-sided and based on errors and incorrect
assumptions. And second, that the ICANN staff felt that even though they erroneously
thought we had a poor proposal, we still merit further consideration (negotiation
with ICANN towards becoming a registry).Indeed, this indicates that our chances
are actually *better* than they were previously, if this process is open and fair.
If you feel our chances are worse, especially after the errors in the ICANN staff's
analysis have been pointed out, then you must also think that this process isn't
open and fair.
Finally, we have the (tm) mark on .Web because the case is not over.
We are appealing the case because we feel that the judge made serious errors on matter
of law, and we continue to assert trademark rights.
Unless, of course, ICANN wishes
to contact us regarding those trademark rights, in which case we'd be more than pleased
to add to them to the negotiation. In my personal opinion, it might be appropriate
for ICANN to hold those rights in trust for the Internet as a whole, and were we
to be selected as the .Web registry, I would personally be inclined to see such happen.
Again,
in an open and fair process, this wouldn't be an issue.
I'm glad I could answer
your questions for you, and I thank you for asking them in a civil manner.
Christopher
Ambler