|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: new.net
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001 [email protected] wrote: > Jim Dixon wrote: [restoring deleted text:] ::: On Thu, 8 Mar 2001 [email protected] wrote: :: ::: Corporate entities should be *required* to register in the flat dot-com ::: namespace, IMHO, and not be *allowed* names in any other namespace. > > First I'll remind you that there is a world outside of the United > > States. Then I'll ask: are you at all serious? You expect to ban > > UK companies from registering in .co.uk? > > Last I checked, dot-com was never a US-specific domain. I don't see > anything US-centric in my posting, other than the reference to the US > PTO. Well, your proposal was that corporate entities be required to register in .COM and banned from any other name space, which by any normal reading bans them from .co.uk, .de, .fr, and several other name spaces. > As for my being serious--no, a ban would be silly. But it *is* food > for thought when contemplating the trend toward globalism over the > past ten years. When starting a new corporate entity, should you come > up with a name which is unique only to your own state or country? Or > should you do a global name search to define a new one and gain global > trademark protection for it? Names in .CO.UK used to be free, but the registry was run by a committee which delegated names slowly and often only after protracted disputes. When Nominet began its very efficient management of the UK registry we noticed an immediate, large jump in the number of customers registering there and a corresponding large drop in the number registering in .COM, despite the fact that Nominet was then charging considerably more than the InterNIC for a name. That is, when given the opportunity, people and companies vote for local name spaces and therefore against a single, global, flat name space. > If the dot-com registry were operated efficiently and backed by a > trademark authority that had respect throughout the world, then it would > be less costly to set up and protect a new corporate name. In most countries there are dozens of trademark categories. Having the rights to a name in one category does not give you exclusive rights in all. You are suggesting that the world in effect collapse thousands of name spaces into one, and one that is already more than overpopulated. Some time ago I looked up allTheGoodNamesAreGone.com -- sure enough, it was gone. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015
|