ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [registrars] RE: PDP Dec 05: Reserved Names Working Group: response needed

  • To: Marcus Faure <faure@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [registrars] RE: PDP Dec 05: Reserved Names Working Group: response needed
  • From: Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 05:15:04 -0400
  • Cc: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "'Peter Stevenson- Fabulous.com'" <peter.stevenson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Tim Ruiz'" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Registrar Constituency'" <registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Ray Fassett'" <rfassett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Liz Williams'" <liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <200705020812.l428CQv7004735@brian.voerde.globvill.de>
  • Organization: Tucows Inc.
  • References: <200705020812.l428CQv7004735@brian.voerde.globvill.de>
  • Reply-to: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221)
If I were king, I'd move on from this discussion to something less anticompetitive, although I can imagine why potential registry operators would want to limit the scope of competition in the manner described. 

Marcus Faure wrote:

Hello,

I do not have a problem with a company using tld.com for their own
website. I do have a problem with a "registrar" offering 3rd level
registrations under tld.com, especially if they tell you that this is
the way the internet is structured, and the reason it is structured
like that is because they have a good deal with [insert name of big icann
registrar]. This may not be within our scope, but if I were king I'd rule this out. 

Yours,
Marcus



The cc.com business
relies on confusing users and leaves them in the hands of a commercial
institution with no oversight, 
Such issues are not inherent in the two-letter strings themselves.  If there
is an issue relating to how the strings are used, that is probably outside
of the scope of domain name policy per se.

There is no reason why an entity named Hu is required to be beholden to the
nation of Hungary for that entity's inability to register its name as a
domain name, any more than endeavors in the fields of electrical engineering
or information technology (ee.jobs, it.jobs) should be blocked by "claims"
of the nations of Estonia and Italy.

Must Procter & Gamble buy out the nation of Papua New Guinea simply to
register their own trademark as a domain name?

PS - UM, MR. and MS. user, this sort of NO IQ BS BY policy fiat IS bad PR
for US, of the kind that SO makes ME want TO throw things AT MY TV (IE - BE
IT AN AX or similar instrument). 
(That sentence is brought to by the ccTLD's for Palestine, United States
Minor Outlying Islands, Mauritania, Montserrat, Norway, Iraq, Bahamas,
Belarus Iceland, Puerto Rico, the United States, Somalia, Montenegro, Tonga,
Austria, Myanmar, Tuvalu, Ireland, Netherlands Antilles, or Aland Islands.)
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>