Ron Fitzherbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What I mean by netTM (which I guess I'll TM here) is a "new"
>classification of trademark -- one that applies to the Internet only
>and requires that the "TM" be the FQDN -- ie, xyz.com and xyz.net can
>be two totally different entities and neither of which would need to
>be the "real" world Xyz Corp.
Since I know very little about trademark law, I won't speculate on the
ramifications of this from the legal standpoint. However, the current
DNS technology supports this. In fact, in the example I posted,
apache.org and apache.net are both different from apache.com.
There can be as many apache.tld as the number of TLDs that are
currently feasible using current DNS technology (another debatable
issue I'll skip for now).
>Why is not the TLD taken into consideration? If it is not ultimately
>going to be part of the equation then lets just get rid of them. Right
>now NSI, etc. seem to think that xyz.com = xyz.net = xyz.org = xyz???
>If it all boils down to "xyz" why bother with the rest?
I think this is an unfair characterization of NSI's policy. It
doesn't actively restrict multiple registrants from using the same
name in different TLDs.
>To make a longer message (but have less messages) I'm going to go off
>on a tangent a bit. In the discussions of the porsche "issue" we've
>seen that they think porschecar is bad -- what about mycarisaporsche,
>is that bad? If so, what about a domain name (with a porsche host
>name) like www.porsche.greatcars.com, is that bad, is
>www.porsche.suckycars.com worse?
Since what goes "underneath" the SLD is at the SLD's discretion, I
imagine if Porsche has any issues with what greatcars.com or
suckycars.com is doing, they need to take them up with those companies
directly. Whatever registry they're in does not need to be involved
at all unless a court decides that it needs to be.
--gregbo
