[ALAC] [LAC-ALS] [EURO-ALS] .xxx

[José Ovidio Salgueiro A.]

I agree with Wendy and Patrick



José Ovidio Salgueiro A.
jsalgueiro at cantv.net


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: At Large Advisory Committee 
  To: Vittorio Bertola 
  Cc: 'Interim ALAC' ; euro-als at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 11:05 AM
  Subject: Re: [LAC-ALS] [ALAC] [EURO-ALS] .xxx


  [Something seems wrong with the mailing lists.]

  Vittorio,

  my 2 (euro)cents:

  I quite agree with Wendy. ICANN is in the business of making the DNS
  system stable and secure. It has no role in monitoring the content, nor
  what is being done with a TLD, as long as the stability and security of
  the DNS system can be guaranteed.  ICANN should not evaluate a business
  plan either. The only guarantee it could ask is that the TLD is being
  run for the whole duration of the contract.

  Whether the porn industry supports triple x or not is irrelevant, as
  long as ICM registry can securely run the TLD.
  Remember,  Jon Postel wanted to create hundreds on new TLDs back in
  1998. This is the plan we should encourage ICANN to follow.



  Patrick

  Vittorio Bertola wrote, On 30/01/2007 10:16:
  > Just pushing the issue again - if we want to be heard on this, we need 
  > to come up with a statement in a not too long timeframe, definitely 
  > before Lisbon.
  >
  > Specifically:
  >
  > Bret Fausett ha scritto:
  >   
  >> On the money printing machine argument, this is an argument in favor of no
  >> new generic TLDs at all. I don't see it as unique to .XXX.
  >>     
  >
  > No, the point is that if you had a TLD that is useful to someone (as any 
  > other TLD that was created, basically), then defensive registrations 
  > would be a price that we collectively have to pay to get more names 
  > available out there. But if the TLD is not wanted by its own community 
  > (and it seems unlikely that adult webmasters are actually going to move 
  > into it, just to be filtered out more easily), then what you're left 
  > with is a TLD that more or less only contains defensive registrations 
  > and pay-per-click sites, and that is a nonsense to me.
  >
  > OTOH, I think that defensive registrations are a silly method to protect 
  > one's brand, as it doesn't scale, and moreover it helps create scarcity 
  > of good names - so it's time that ICANN discourages it and ensures that 
  > there are effective methods to act ex post, rather than being concerned 
  > about how to help it.
  >   


  _______________________________________________
  ALAC mailing list
  ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
  http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

  _______________________________________________
  LAC-ALS mailing list
  LAC-ALS at atlarge-lists.icann.org
  http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-als_atlarge-lists.icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org/attachments/20070130/c423d63b/attachment.html