|> -----Original Message----- |> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] |> Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 3:12 AM |> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |> Subject: Re: Verisign DNS -- another possible effect |> |> |> |> > CUSTOMER: If |> |> http://www.domain_with+illegal&nonstandard+chara|> cters.com |> > |> |> works when I type it into my browser, then |> why can't I have an "&" in |> > my domain name? |> |> Which reminds me about when Barnes & Noble were first |> creating their online service. They wanted to use their |> trademarked name of "Barnes&Noble" as their domain. Network |> Solutions said it wasn't possible. Now we see the http://www.Barnes&Noble.com/ |> does work, however it takes you to a Verisign site. |> |> I'm sure Barnes & Noble would be very interested in this new development and the illegal use of their trademark.
Will not hold water. The user of the trademark is the person entering it which is outside the control of the entity controlling where it resolves to. The domain name doesn't exist and is not under the control of anyone. A court would throw out any arguments based on that sort of situation. Could help in building pressure against Verisign however and is a good example of a negative impact from the inclusion of wildcards in the DNS. The argument would however mean that all wildcard entries in DNS are under the same conditions and should not be used, not something we would want to see however. Darryl (Dassa) Lynch
