Hi,
There is also an interesting legal problem lurking with
http://www.deja.fr/ and http://www.bq--aduwvya.fr/
A court might find me guilty of trademark violation of "deja" with the
first URL, but I can't see them upholding the same for "bq--aduwvya"
Steve Dyer
At 03:37 05/12/2000 -0500, vint cerf wrote:
>from a purely mechanical point of view, if the character encoding
>of these two strings makes them distinct, one might have to treat
>them as distinct registrations - unless a very mechanical means of
>converting them both into some canonical form were available to
>make them "match" - one would imagine that such canonicalization
>process might require language-specific knowledge and that sounds
>pretty challenging.
>
>Vint
>
>At 07:09 PM 12/4/2000 -0500, Richard Shockey wrote:
> >At 05:00 PM 12/4/2000 -0500, Dan Kolis wrote:
> >>In the present regime, its not surprising the frist below does not resolve
> >>and the second does:
> >>
> >>http://www.d�j�.fr/
> >>http://www.deja.fr/
> >>
> >>
> >>In the proposed regime, its not obvious what to do from a purely consumer
> >>point of view.
> >
> >Depends on who is the consumer... to the French the difference here is
> completely obvious... and this whole problem is just "another Anglo-Saxon
> plot" etc...
> >
> >
> >>Verisigns view would be each is completely unique. ICANN's
> >>dispute resolution would say there completely identifical and one has
> to go!
> >>But ICANN's resolution makes this problem appear in the first place.
> >
> >
> >
>
