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

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

However, when you file a trademark, you must specify the class it will be registered in. You are granted the use of that string of letters for use in commerce within that class. 

Apple records VS Apple computers my favorite analogy. They each have a trademark, but one is allowed to use theirs with music and the other with computers. If there was a dot computers or dot pcs and a dot music or dot records then there would never be a conflict between the two as to who has rights to which domain name in which tld. 

As long as ICANN artificially restricts namespace and free trade and only allows tlds that are generic in nature like com net org biz, then there will always be conflict. However by doing so they allow a handful of corporations to monopolize their string of letters in every new tld that is introduced by having sunrise periods. 

Example; I have a mark on "Most Wanted" as a newspaper/publication. America's Most Wanted has it for a tv show or actually it says "entertainment" television show. I have never felt that mostwanted.com should belong to me simply because I have a TM. Now if there was a mostwanted.news or dot pub for publications, I may feel differently.

What happens is this. Corporation A has the name G-Money. They sell money clips. They register a TM for the string of letters GMoney and G-Money. Every time a new tld is introduced, ICANN sticks in the sunrise period so Corporation A, GMoney, gets to go register gmoney dot everything ICANN introduces.

Corporation B has just formed years later. They take the name GMoney, but they sell financial services. They look and dang, no domain names in any tld available because the money clip Corporation A/Gmoney has all of them in every tld.

Now, dream with me a moment where there is an ICANN that is actually fair and balanced and who does want to increase competition. I know it's far fetched, but go with me here for a minute.

There is a dot fin for financial services and a dot retail. The Corporation A above would not own gmoney.fin. so Corporation B would be able to get their domain name. Gosh, what a nice dream that was.

The tlds that represent classes of TMs would be restricted to those who hold the mark that matches the class they have a TM in. Only in the case where a company holds TMs in multiple classes would they be entitled to a domain name for each of the tlds that match each class.

It is very simple, but when I asked Vint Cerf about this, he stated he isn't sure if they would be able to get a list or if there was a list of all of those classes. If there was no list then no one could register a mark in the first place. Yes, internationally there are more classes, but each country does have their list and we have a WIPO that should be able to stop helping corporations steal domain names from individual users long enough to write those down for Vint and the ICANN board to consider.

Chris McElroy AKA NameCritic
And yes, this idea has now been presented to the DoC while they consider whether or not to renew ICANN as our Fuhrer.
http://icann.thingsthatjustpissmeoff.com 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Hugh Dierker 
  To: kidsearch ; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 11:10 AM
  Subject: Re: [ga] Policy Issues relating to IDN at the top-level


  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.