Here are two quotes from
the letter:
"Based on our collective industry experience, we are of the
opinion that the underlying intention of Section 6 was to
allow for the operation of closed gTLDs only under very
defined circumstances.
Specifically, that closed
gTLDs should be reserved for only those strings in which the
applicant possesses established (i.e., legally recognized)
intellectual property rights, basically brand names. We
believe that this interpretation of Section 6 is inherently
logical especially in view of the discussions that preceded
the opening of gTLDs -- which focused, in very large part, on
expanding choices and opportunities as well as promoting
innovation, for Internet consumers worldwide."
"Further, generic words used
in a generic way belong to all people. It is inherently in the
public interest to allow access to generic new gTLDs to the
whole of the Internet Community, e.g., .BLOG, .MUSIC, .CLOUD.
Allowing everyone to register and use second level domain
names of these powerful, generic TLDs is exactly what we
envisioned the New gTLD Program would do. In contrast, to
allow individual Registry Operators to segregate and close-off
common words for which they do not possess intellectual
property rights in effect allows them to circumvent
nation-states’ entrenched legal processes for obtaining
legitimate and recognized trademark protections."
----
Best,
Kathy
Kathy Kleiman
Internet Counsel, Fletcher, Heald & Hildreth
Co-Founder, NCUC