Return to wgb Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: jandl
Date/Time: Sat, April 15, 2000 at 9:22 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.0 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: I sort of agree, with reservations

Message:
 

 
                There are thousands of smaller companies who have spent the time and money to trademark their names and logos, but have limited cash resources to fund ICANN in the proportions you have stated.  I agree that paying for "orchestra" seating is a good idea, however.  I would just make it a little easier and still stiff enough so that the average speculator would not be inclined to join in.  I'm inclined to say $5,000 per registration and $1,000 per year renewal.  Also, there would have to be proof that the name is legitimately trademarked. 

          I also agree that the .com's would be open territory and trademarks would not apply there, except for exact matches to names like coca-cola, microsoft, disneyworld, disneyland, waltdisney, hewlett-packard, etc.  It would, however, allow microsoftnot, fordsucks, etc. (which already exist)or other derivations.  Why shouldn't a computer systesm builder who does not use the MS OS say so in his name?  How about xyzcosupportsucks.  Bad PR is no excuse for censorship.


    I honestly doubt any of this will fly, however.  Someone, somewhere will come up with a reason why we should not gauge the big boys unless they have a large vote on how ICANN is operated.  Here we go again.  Big brother (corporations) is watching (controlling) you (average citizen).
                                I support a limited number of 'famous marks' in a new TLD for a 'sunrise period'. The names would be based on WIPO recommendations. Tthe list of names would, in fact 'force' a sale to the holders of those famous marks. Since the value of those names would like be several thousand times that of non-protected names there should be some way to 'extract' that value for the benefit of the Internet community as a whole, rather than for the benefit of one or more Registries.

Therefore, I propose that the names be allocated to their respective companies for a fee of, say US $ 100,000 on allocation, with an annual renewal fee of US $ 10,000. These fees would be paid into a trust, the income from which would be used to defray ICANN expenses, thereby reducing the support costs payable by various constituencies.
     

 


Message Thread:


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy