Re: [ICANN-EU] Re: [icann-candidates] Don't waste your endorsement vote

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Lutz and all,

Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:

> * Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> >Lutz,
> >>I'm conservative for good reasons. Something to think about: Will shop.de
> >>withdrawn due to the creation of the TLD shop?
> >
> >Why should it?
> >I don't understand.
>
> http://www.denic.de/doc/faq/vergaberichtlinie.html  (cut&waste without tools)
> Article 2: ... It is not allowed to have second level domain name identical
>            to any top level domain name (currently arpa, com, ...) ...
>
> >>You might read my position as: 'No new TLDs.' This is the correct short
> >>answer. The longer one is: 'Show me how a new TLD solves a problem over a
> >>long period of time without creating new ones, and I will not resist.'
> >
> >You may be right, new TLDs will not dramatically "solve problems", but
> >they may improve things.
>
> Please give me a hint about possible long term improvments other than
> increasing profits for more companies.

  The improvements are many and varied Lutz as has been discussed
time and time again on the Domain-Policy list as well as the DNSO
list as well.  But here are just a very few:

1.) More diversity in the name space for various purposes not including
     commercial ones, such a .LIB for libraries, .sucks for  protest sites,
     ,union for union organizations and other related areas.

2.) Opens up the name space in DNS for specialized commercial and
     non commercial domain names.

3.) Relieves the shortage in the .COM name space.

4.) Improves the robustness of the DNS as a whole.

>
>
> >Right now, the "open" TLDs are all in the capable hands of a unique
> >company. The introduction of (a limited number of) new TLDs will provide
> >alternatives.
>
> Currently there are several registrars for the same TLDs. So a fair
> competition does not require new TLDs.

 Unfortunately this is a misconception that seems to have caught on for
some odd reason.  You can't have FAIR competition unless there is
diversity.  New TLD's provides for this diversity.  New Registrars only
goes part way...

>
>
> >We may have different business models, different level of protection of
> >trademarks, different dispute resolution mechanism, and so on.
>
> Even org and net had such a policy. How will you prevent the same fate for a
> new TLD? How will identical trademarks in different countries be handled?
> How will identical trademarks in the same country but in different
> categories be handled?

  That will be up to the respective countries involved or through international
treaties to include clauses for this purpose.  But these are none the less
good questions.  However they have already been answered a number
of times and in a number of ways.

>
>
> "brand"."class"."ccTLD".trade will hardly be accepted.
> So you will run into the same problems as today.
>
> A new eu domain? Why? eu.int does exist.

eu.int is not a TLD.  Hence it is not popular for the purpose it
was intended for.

>
>
> >Why should this not be worthed trying?
>
> IMHO: The benefits does not overcome the drawbacks.

  Of course you are entitled to your opinion.  Unfortunately you
are in the minority..

>
>
> >Innovation has been the keyword for Internet. Of course, it is normal for
> >the innovators of yesterday to become conservative today. But other
> >innovators will follow ;>)
>
> Nobody was able to tell me a good reasoning for doing inventions only with
> new TLDs.

  Than you have not been paying very close attention...

Regards,


--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208