[ncdnhc-discuss] Fw: [council] GAC and country name reservations

[Jefsey Morfin]

On 08:54 02/10/01, Dany Vandromme said:
>Could you develop your concerns about the reasons for WIPO, not to be a
>world based organisation. Are you afraid that WIPO is working only for a
>latin-type framework, without accounting for the various alphabet you
>are mentionning?

Dear Danny,
from what I gather sorting out IP issues of iDNs is quite impossible in the 
way the UDRP is set-up. The reason why is that with strict ASCII (even 
French, German, etc... create problems, not to speak of Russian or Greek) 
we meet subjective evaluations of the nature of the conflict even

The same ideogram in Chines, Japanese, Korean may look the same, sound the 
same and mean the same, yet to be translated in different ascii strings. In 
such cases - which will progressively the overwhelming majority as the most 
complex so the most controverted - the WIPO system is meaningless.

This is why I call for a long for compelete review. Let get real and simple.

1. a domain name is the name of the registrant internet domain (site, 
content, expertise, IP, machines, know-how, image, staff, etc...) as per 
RFC 920, EDI definitions, international practice since 1978 and common sense.

2. "selling your name" http://www.netsol.com/ has no common sense (would 
you sell me "Dany Vandrome"?). The AFNIC understood it well. A name is a 
name, it designates something for ever and as long as it does exist its 
active. So there is a cost for registering and a cost for using. Transfers 
and renewals are inept concepts and lead to an otherwise meaningless 
"cybersquatting".

3. DN are totally transparent to IP (TM, copyright, etc...). The domains 
are not and as whole or heir components or projects are subject to many 
existing laws the UDRP therefore conflict with.

4. DN are a service to the Users and actually belong to the User Community. 
It is a way for them to get more simply at the site (or now simply to get 
at it since an IP address my serve thousands of domains). UDRP is here only 
to protect the *users rights*. Is the used DN confusing or not.

Decision has absolutely nothing to do with WIPO (WIPO will only say if the 
name may be used on the site not if user prefer using it to access a site 
wearong it or not). The decision is to be to the users: "are they confused 
or not".  This is why I say that the question should be addressed to a 
randomly chosen jury of the characters set culture - may be 250 people 
getting $1 per vote. They are presented the contending sites/projects and 
tell the one they prefer under the considered name.

This makes the UDRP an anti-confusion test to the user benefit. Such a test 
can then be taken after registering and before investing. If usccessful it 
makes the site UDRP proof as the Registrant shown hos ghood faith.

This is the only way to address user feelings over ideograms.


As a general comment, I think ICANN is to end its Far-West approach:

- they do not manage domains but placers. Registries are placer offices. 
You can lose them over a pocker or a single man justice over the bar 
counter you chose (The WIPO Saloon, usally).

- no general law but contracts

- ranch management style without any bylaws consideration. Boss' positions 
the Gospel.

DNs have to become life-long and stable, not resellable per se, registrar 
independant, with password for the Registrant to change parameters and 
Registrar, with a physical title (smart card?). User interests must be 
protected. Innovation permitted. Security insured.

There are probably several solutions to that. They all join in security and 
user respect. And in the use of the Internet architecture (interconnects) 
rather than old concepts (connects or even end-to-end links as in Joe Sims' 
contracts).

Jefsey