<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#333333" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Excuse my ignorance, but I am
interested in exploring the relationship of the vertical </font>integration
- or of removal of cross ownership restrictions - decision of the last
year, and the imminent private ownership of entire tld spaces, and
along with it, the exclusive use of some generic words on the right
side of the dot, for ones own business interests. Did the requirement
to have non-owned registrars also mean that domains names were
obligatorily to be sold in the open market on a non-discriminatory
basis? Was any obligations to sell domain names in open market on non
discriminatory basis, in any case, a part of registry and registrar
agreements?<br>
<br>
Sorry for asking these simple and basic questions, but I always took it
for granted that any tld would be available for anyone on a non
discriminatory basis, of course for a price. Perhaps, allocating
exclusive tlds to respective trademark owners can be considered as a
special case (though I have arguments against such a practice as well)
but to allow generic words and names as exclusive tld spaces is quite
un-understandable. What pulbic interest is it supposed to serve? What
was behind this decision? <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
On Monday 18 June 2012 05:01 PM, William Drake wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:168A8AE7-13FF-4444-BC0A-A6881D5B92BF@uzh.ch"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi Andrea
On Jun 18, 2012, at 12:52 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Thanks Bill.
I'm not sure why you are "mixing" the discussion on trademarks with
the one on competition/antitrust, as generally speaking they are two
separate issues. I provided the exchange of letters just as a
(hopefully useful) reference.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Sure, thanks. I just thought they both spoke to the same point about GAC advice, the relative autonomy of the board, and the benefits of a model in which the ultimate 'oversight' decision making authority is not necessarily vested in governments, which from time to time actually don't make optimal decisions. Plus, I just really like the EC quotes in the trademark exchange ;-)
See you tomorrow in parliament,
BD
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>