Dear JFC
Would you care to elaborate instead of asserting stuff peremptorily
(and implicitly, and vaguely) please?
Please keep in mind that many here including myself are not linked
materially or ideologically with what some people call "the
naming-industrial complex".
Also, with regard the usual clamor *against* adding new TLDs and
that asserts that it is extortion on brands, please know that many
here would think, to the contrary (and with apologies for the short
version), that many more TLDs will make it futile/impossible to
try to subject an alphanumeric string to trademark law (the
sought-for result, from my point of view). This analysis is also
compatible with the view shared here by at least a few that
alphanumeric strings of an *addressing* system *should not* be
subjected to IP laws or regimes.
If it is other "harms" that you think will hit us, please explain
why you think DNS is not scalable at the TLD level.
Nicolas
On 14/06/2011 7:48 AM, JFC Morfin wrote:
[log in to unmask]"
type="cite">
Dear Mary,
I am afraid that the last word is definitly
wrong.
- Does the New gTLD Program help the security and stability
of the
Internet, or at least not harm it,?
- In cases where potential harms have been identified, does
the New
gTLD Program provide processes for addressing and/or
mitigating such
harms?
- Has the Board taken expert advice in those areas where it
required
specialist knowledge? In cases where a single result was
deemed
insufficient or potentially biased, did it seek further
advice?
We believe that in all cases the answer is a resounding
“Yes.”
What I observe is that to the two first questions and to the
two
following questions "has the author of this petition taken expert
advice in those areas where it required basic architectural
precaution
and knowledge?" and "In cases where a single result was deemed
insufficient or potentially biased, did he/she seek further
advice?"
I observe that the answer is a resounding "No".
Some people from the Board seem to know better about the DNS than
lawyers, business lobbyists, activists and Australian naming team
afficionados (25% of the signatorees) at the origin of the New
gTLD
Program.
jfc
At 05:48 14/06/2011, [log in to unmask] wrote:
Dear all,
This petition, being circulated amongst some ICANN participants,
may be
of interest; it urges the Board to approve the new gTLD program
when it
has its special meeting in Singapore this coming Monday (20
June):
http://www.petitions24.com/newtlds
It also touches on questions such as consensus,
multi-stakeholder input
and ICANN's credibility and accountability issues, which have
been
regular topics of discussion on this list.
Cheers
Mary
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two White Street
Concord,
NH 03301 USA Email:
[log in to unmask]
Phone:
1-603-513-5143 Webpage:
http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php Selected
writings available
on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at:
http://ssrn.com/author=437584