[NA-Discuss] Fwd: Edits and comments to NARALO/ALAC position statement on GAC scorecard
evan at telly.org
Thu Mar 31 20:37:23 UTC 2011
On 31 March 2011 16:07, Richard Tindal <richardtindal at me.com> wrote:
> First a clarification -- I dont think its fair to say that Applicant
> Guidebook policy development work for the last couple of years is unrelated
> to .PARIS, .NYC or other geo TLDs. More than 50% of policy work has
> concerned trademarks, and there will be at least as many trademark issues
> in large city TLDs as there will be in other TLDs
> To your question -- If .NYC is delayed until 2013 due to the 'limitation'
> method I think domain registrants in New York City will be denied more
> choice and better prices for an additional 2 years
Most end users are not domain registrants. Your issues are not their issues.
Are there any current New York - related websites (or for that matter, ones
based in Paris, Berlin or London) that are inaccessible to the public
because of the current naming environment?
What about the choices offered to consumers who find what they want using
search engines and referral services rather than domain names? They're not
affected ONE BIT.
And I still don't accept your denial assertions, even on behalf of
registrants. I note that .co -- a ccTLD that is now marketed as a gTLD -- is
charging more than double what .com charges for second level domains. Here
is one case in which the entrance of a new (pseudo-)gTLD has most certainly
*not* led to lower prices for registrants; just the opposite, in fact.
I wonder how much of the scarcity you claim, could be eliminated if the
common trademark doctrine of "use it or lose it" was extended to domain
More information about the NA-Discuss