Re: [atlarge-discuss] FW: [atlarge-panel] 006 Name - Panel approves Timeline and Schedule

["todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>]

These are all well established pre-Internet entities that spent 10's if not
hundreds of millions of dollars to create and promulgate their trademarks.
So if its a Trademark you are talking about that is totally different.

Todd

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>
To: "Judith Oppenheimer" <joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com>
Cc: "'Atlarge Discuss List'" <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 6:30 AM
Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] FW: [atlarge-panel] 006 Name - Panel approves
Timeline and Schedule


> I personally prefer a name for our organisation which sounds like more
than
> a website.
>
> Do you talk about ICANN or ICANN.org?
>
> Do you talk about Ford or Ford.com?
>
> Do you talk about The Red Cross or theredcross.org?
>
> Do you talk about Disney or Disney.com?
>
> Etc etc etc...
>
> Personally, I feel we are going to be reported in the media as one of many
> vying organisations, and I feel it is probably bad for our corporate image
> to be branded with some stupid .TLD ending stuck on the end.
>
> The .TLD ending points to a domain which points to a website ...
>
> The website is "about" the organisation : it is not the organisation
itself.
>
> Obviously there are some who can recognise the subtlety of using the TLD
> ending in our internet age, but I honestly think most members of the
public
> will not get that subtlety and to them it will just look "naff".
>
> Just my views : let the membership decide
>
> Richard
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Judith Oppenheimer <joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com>
> To: 'Richard Henderson' <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>; 'Vittorio
Bertola'
> <vb@vitaminic.net>
> Cc: 'Atlarge Discuss List' <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 2:15 PM
> Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] FW: [atlarge-panel] 006 Name - Panel
approves
> Timeline and Schedule
>
>
> > > (b) TLD-ending
> > > to be excluded from formal name.
> >
> > I am unclear as to your intent here.
> >
> > Are you suggesting that a name sans domain registration (and therefore
> sans
> > TLD-ending) should be considered?
>
> Not what I had in mind - it's obviously useful to have a web address that
> identifies the words in our name, just as Icann does not have a website at
> Neulevel, and Ford does not have a website at Peugeot etc etc
>
> >
> > Or that a name with matching registrations should be considered, but
that
> > the primary TLD-ending be excluded from the name as it is written/drawn
as
> > a logo?
>
> Exactly
>
> >
> > Whether the first or the latter, please explain why.
>
> Please see my comments above. It's elementary, my dear Oppenheimer!
>
> >
> > J
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > ----------
> > Judith Oppenheimer
> > http://JudithOppenheimer.com
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de