Re: [ga] Policy Issues relating to IDN at the top-level

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

Assuming sarcasm with the proper ounce of truth in your statement.  I use the trademark issue to illustrate the lameness of trying to control creative use of name space from the top down. 
   
  What good would a trademark be if it were developed and then put in a dark box away from the eyes of the world? OK a light box in the corner of the showroom? Pidgeon holing does not work. (some dude named Eddie B. put his name on some SUV and it was called crossmarketing and it worked and still does. Another named Ralph placed a polo rider on perfume and though it stinks it sells)
   
  The language you refer to is not that of the trademarker or the marketer thereof but of the lawyers therefor.
   
  Getting locked into a trademark class is usually a combination of ignorance, lack of funds, lack of coordination between product creators and market creators and a bad lawyer. So your concept of classes is different than a teachers, different than WalMarts, WIPO, ICANN or Amy Vanderbildt. Without even going into Pucks' and Macs' ideas of classless and tastless.
   
  A good place to get an idea of concepts of classes is to pull up several states incorporation papers. Usually at a Secretary of States site. After the basic boilerplate lingua in the beginning, under the purpose of the corp. you will note "any other lawful purpose not specifically proscribed by law" (seemingly redundant yet appropriate). A church, save some differing fees, and a charitable clause and a gunmaker look almost exactly the same. 

  So what i am saying is no you cannot delineate trademarks as you see fit. This gal named Rosa Parks kinda put the kabosh on segregation.
   
  e
  
kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  Wouldn't my proposal to create new TLDs that match trademark classes be
appropriate here since TM holders seem to speak a different language than
the rest of the general public?

Chris McElroyu AKA NameCritic
http://www.wholettheblogout.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" 
To: 
Sent: Monday, May 29, 2006 11:30 AM
Subject: [ga] Policy Issues relating to IDN at the top-level


> [To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org]
> [To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org]
>
> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/idn-tlds/issues-report-28may06.htm
> (What is RSS?)
>
> Policy Issues relating to IDN at the top-level - Preliminary Issues Report
>
> On request from the GNSO Council, ICANN staff has prepared a preliminary
> Issues Report that sets out policy issues involved with the proposed
> introduction of IDNs into the root zone of the DNS. The GNSO Council has
> followed the report's recommendation to establish a joint working group
> in coordination with the ccNSO to analyze, prioritize, and select issues
> for further policy development.
>
> Comments on the report can be posted to idn-tlds-comments@xxxxxxxxx
> and viewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/idn-tlds-comments.
>
> -- 
> Glen de Saint Géry
> GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
> gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
> http://gnso.icann.org



			
---------------------------------
Sneak preview the  all-new Yahoo.com. It's not radically different. Just radically better.