Re: [faoc] Re: xTLD BoF and mailing list

[Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>]

You made some reasonable points, but please note the following:

Patrik Faltstrom wrote:

> [gTLD-MoU] was formed by the IAHC committee, and signed by IANA and ISOC,
> not ITU and WIPO.

The IAHC committee was a political coalition of ISOC, IANA,ITU, and WIPO.
Please don't be disingenuous about this.

> So, if one want to start a discussion on how/if/when gTLDs have to be
> created, one have to discuss things like IF we should have gTLDs, and more
> important (as we can say that removing .com is not possible) how the
> registries are to exist.

This discussion is taking place. That is what the Notice of Inquiryand the
Green Paper are about. It is more than obvious that the gTLD
did NOT establish a consensus about this. Otherwise the gTLD-MoU
would have been implemented with no objection.

> The only way of solving these things, IAHC and POC found after discussing
> this for some 1.5 years, that one have to limit the number of registries,
> to probably one or two, and also that things work best if the registries
> together form the registry, like in the UK and Sweden -- especially the UK
> which have a system that works!

Bureaucratic agencies always seem to believe that limiting marketplacesto one
or two easily regulated players is the answer to any problems
and conflicts. Certainly this makes life easier for the established, vested
interests, such as the trademark holders. And it m,akes life easier
for the regulators. But it is not the path toward an open, thriving, diverse
and innovative market.
The Internet reached its current glorious state of development precisely
because it was structured to allow private organizations and players the
freedom to jump on it and minimized administrative overhead. We need
to keep thinking along those lines.

> gTLD -- which in turn says that we should have many registries, which the
> trade mark community says definitely no to because disputes will be so
> difficult to handle.

The trademark community is just wrong. Domain names are not trademarksand
infringement that takes place on the Web can be rememdied without
giving trademark holders prior review of every domain name handed out
in the world. The trademark/copyright interests have a long history of
making outrageous and unreasonable claims. They wanted to ban videotape
recorders in the United States. They were wrong about that, and they
are wrong about domain names. Privately, many trademark lawyers
agree with me. But they recognize that it is in the economic self-interest
of large multinational trademark holders to extend their property rights
as far as possible. If we let "big trademark" run rampant over the
Internet, they will do it. Therefore, we must stand up to them.
Learn how to say "NO!"

> There are hundreds of nasty dragons hidden in the GP paper which you will
> encounter not until you start writing down the details.

Bring on the dragons!
Milton Mueller