Craig,
{ I would argue that DNs are intellectual property because as a DN holder
{ I receive a kind of title to that string of characters when used in
{ relation to DNS services. I choose that particular string of
{ characters... a functional resource... and that string consequently
{ becomes a property of my presence on the system... a property that is
{ uniquely my own within the legacy root.
Absolutely correct. The string *becomes* a presence, and it should be up
to you to make it 'valuable' to associate that string with your
activities. But isnt the TM argument just the opposite? -- that strings
that are *already* associated with certain activities (and in certain
locales and for certain periods of time) have precedence (i.e. value).
...
{ Remember, I don't want to rule out anyone's right to own
{ whateversucks.*, and I don't think there's much point in pre-empting
{ variations on *whatever* either. I'm just saying that trademark
holders
{ have a legitimate beef. They're particularly vulnerable to exploitation
{ in this medium.
And to think it all began with rtfm.mit.edu! Pretend the pointer has a
meaning, and lo! those whose pretensions are greater than yours will
crowd in. Of course they say their right to pointers which have meaning
is vulnerable -- but isnt 'marketable' what they mean?
...
{ Consequently Paraguayan authors have a hard time getting published
{ outside the country. There's a "golden rule" sort of lesson there that
{ unfortunately doesn't seem to fit for the Internet.
Boundary, n. In political geography, an
imaginary line between two nations, separating
the imaginary rights of one from the imaginary
rights of another. -- Ambrose Bierce, The
Devil's Dictionary
{ 1) I wouldn't go as far as Greg Skinner's suggestion of a waiting
period
{ allowing for challenges. Deciding on how to resolve challenges sounds
{ like an issue that would open a big can of worms.
But recognizing the kinds of challenges that may arise is a critical part
of formulating any new policy.
{ 2) Requiring a statement about the purpose of the domain name being
{ registered isn't likely to help much, but it probably won't hurt, so
{ there are potential gains there. On the other hand, how hard is this to
{ implement? What would this involve with regard to existing
{ registrations?
Implementation is not the issue, but the *durability* of any such
statement. As policy, you'd have cybersquatting squared: not just "I
intend to develop this site to sell Porsche brand bagels," but the next
week, "I changed my mind, I guess I'll go into car parts."
{ 3) The idea of the domain contacts having to provide harder name and
{ location information sounds appealing to me, but I haven't seen much
{ progress in determining how this can be implemented. NSI has little
{ incentive to change; chaos and uncertainty means that more names will
{ get registered as people engage in predatory or defensive strategies.
Nemmind the TM issues, just add in a tipster database where we can all
inform on one another, watchin where they aint doing what theys sposta.
Gotta love it, as the sig says ;-)
kerry
Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of
body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day.
-- Th Jefferson, 1816
