Bringing to your attention: "Ron Paul, former Representative and candidate for U.S. President, has filed a complaint with ICANN <http://www.icann.org/> over ownership of the domain names ronpaul.com and ronpaul.org, currently owned by Ron Paul supporters. Dr. Paul says the current owners should give up the names because he has a common law trademark on his name. There is some dispute over whether the owners offered to sell Dr. Paul the names and if so, for what sum. More here <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/11/ron-paul-files-suit-for-domain-name-leaving-supporters-bummed-but-fighting/>from FoxNews, here<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/10/ron-paul-copyright_n_2658825.html>from the Huffington Post. " On 27 February 2013 08:46, Maria Farrell <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hosting a discussion in Beijing would be a great idea. People are eager to > debate it so would come to our meeting. > > What do we need to do to make it happen..? > > Maria > > > On 27 February 2013 06:14, Dan Krimm <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> As I absorb the two sides of this discussion (seeing merits in both) I'm >> finding myself wanting a more conceptual framework in which to evaluate >> the >> points. >> >> Technically, a domain (TLD) is a domain (2LD) is a domain (3LD). [Point >> Milton] >> >> Administratively, different levels have different agents of control. It >> seems to me that in one sense the *control* is the important thing. Who >> gets to determine who gets to have/control one of these, at whatever >> level? >> [Point Kathy] >> >> If TLDs were ubiquitous (following their being cheap and easy to set up) >> it >> wouldn't matter so much who controlled one string or another because there >> would be robust competition and alternatives. Milton's stance would be >> supported by real non-scarcity in TLDs. >> >> In fact, though, even though TLDs are being opened up from near stasis, >> the >> barrier to entry of application fee and the simple fact of finite >> administrative bandwidth in processing applications means that there will >> still be some degree of meaningful scarcity in the system for the >> foreseeable future. >> >> In that case, is there a strategic advantage (economic/political) in >> getting the string before someone else? (Especially if alternatives are >> not easy to come by -- like if .book exists, but not all those others like >> .bks, etc.) Seems there could be, and that should be a practical >> consideration even if in principle it ought to be moot. >> >> Or it could *all* be moot if no one really uses domains to discover web >> sites anymore. What is the real, practical economic/political value of >> controlling a TLD? [Point Andrew] >> >> Some points here are contingent upon contingencies of current TLD policy >> -- >> in principle they could be mooted by a more global change in policy, but >> that more global change in policy may not be realistically forthcoming >> given the quango-mire that is ICANN. >> >> So, what I'd love to see is a tracing of a dependency-structure for >> current >> and proposed policies. >> >> I'm nowhere near working this out comprehensively myself, but would love >> to >> see those more experienced with the situation in the long term do so, if >> possible. >> >> I think Pro/Con can lead us toward this (sort of a case-study discovery >> process), but I don't think it will get us all the way there by itself. >> Not to discourage it at all, but maybe let's aim further too, yes? >> >> Dan >> >> PS: Regrettably, I can't be present at any forthcoming in-person meetings, >> Beijing or otherwise. But, I can occasionally get to email when I have a >> passing opportunity. Maybe I can offer some questions/comments along the >> way as the discussion develops. >> >> >> -- >> Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and >> do >> not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer. >> >> >> >> At 12:41 PM +0100 2/26/13, Avri Doria wrote: >> >Hi, >> > >> >I think this is a great idea, and something that would best be done by >> >someone who was not partisan on the issue. >> > >> >Where you offering? >> > >> >avri >> > >> >On 26 Feb 2013, at 12:20, Clarinettet wrote: >> > >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> May I submit one easy suggestion. Obviously, as every option, there are >> >>pros and cons. To adopt a common position, we need to balance the pros >> >>and cons. I suggest a worksheet to be created with two columns >> >>representing each side's views and vote from there. That way, everyone >> >>can validity judge and discuss. It's not very easy to follow discussions >> >>on series of emails. >> >> >> >> Do you agree? >> >> >> >> Tara Taubman >> > > -- Internet & Privacy Lawyer - LLM Keep the internet safe http://FlyAKite.org/