I didn't pick Sweden by accident. Think about the way in which Sweden's
NIC administers that ccTLD and you will understand why I said that
pizza-hut.firm creates issues that pzza-hut.se does not. Yes, third party
ownership of pizza-hut.se could violate PIZZA HUT'S rights. But which is
more likely to occur, third party ownership of pizza-hut.se or
pizzahut.com, for example. I'm not advocating that the world adopts the
.se policy - there is dissatisfaction among various users for various
reasons - but Sweden's experience provides some empirical evidence for
alternatives to the .com model.
>Milton Mueller wrote:
>
>> No, it doesn't. You believe that "pizza-hut.se" is a violation of pizza
hut's
>> trademark. You believe that "pizza-hut.firm" is a violation of pizza hut's
>> trademark. My understanding of your position is that
pizza-hut.<anything> is a
>> violation of their rights. Whether or not that is really your position,
that
>> certainly IS going to be the position of Pizza Hut's trademark lawyers.
That has
>> been the position of big TMOs with respect to .net, .org, etc.
>>
>> So, no, there are no new issues posed by expanding the TLD space. One
could also
>> posit that there are no new issues posed by creating new SLD hierachical
>> categories, (e.g., food.us) as long as TMOs believe that mere
registration of a
>> character string corresponding to their TM character string, regardless
of use,
>> constitutes a violation of their rights.
>>
>> But perhaps this exchange would go somewhere constructive if you would
explain
>> what you think those "new" issues are.
>> --MM
>>
>> Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
>>
>> > Not really. New gTLDs create new issues that would not exist if the new
>> > gTLDs did not exist. .firm creates issues not currently present with .se
>> >
>> > I would imagine that a better formulation for your subjectless "it is
>> > about" would be how to create a just procedure that provides a fair
>> > mechanism for the balancing of the rights of the various parties
involved.
>> >
>> > >Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> So the topic at issue here is whether the domain name registration
system
>> > >> should be expanded without recognition of the legal rights of
others - or
>> > >> perhaps there can be some reasonable compromise.
>> > >
>> > >Not really. All of the threats to pre-existing rights exist--or
>> > not--regardless of
>> > >whether "new" gTLDs are created. They exist in current TLDs. It is not,
>> > and never
>> > >has been, about the *application* of existing laws and rights. It is,
and
>> > always
>> > >has been, about the *cost* of policing and enforcing existing laws and
>> > rights.
>> > >
>> > >--MM
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>>
>> --
>> M I L T O N M U E L L E R S Y R A C U S E U N I V E R S I T Y
>> / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
/ / / /
>> / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
>> School of Information Studies
http://istweb.syr.edu/~mueller/
>
>Regards,
>
>--
>Jeffrey A. Williams
>CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
>Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
>E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Contact Number: 972-447-1894
>Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
>
>
>
>
