Single Registrant TLD

[Mary Wong]

Thanks, Avri - and I agree that it would probably be helpful if there are institutional members amongst us who can indicate support for your position. I would add also that indicating interest and support would NOT necessarily mean those organizations are also indicating their intent to apply for a new gTLD (just in case anyone is concerned that expressing such interest at this time might be taken as an indication that their organization will be applying for one).
 
The normative question remains, however. Just because there is no public statement of support from institutional NCSG members, it does NOT necessarily follow that there is none from ANY NGO anywhere in the world (in other words, this lack of indication is not a perfect functional opposite to the IPC, where the expressions of interest from certain brand owners can be taken as an indication of interest in having SRSU TLDs.)
 
Has anyone asked WIPO if they'd like .wipo?
 
Would the UN support .igf? Would large state universities (e.g. the University of California system) want .uc, or wealthy private schools such as Harvard want .harvard? 
 
Etc. .....
 
Cheers
Mary
 
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mwong at piercelaw.edu
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584


>>> 


From: Avri Doria <avri at LTU.SE>
To:<NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
Date: 7/20/2010 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: Single Registrant TLD
I am being charged with not having support for my claim on the necessity of SRSU  specifically:

> I think the point I was interested has been clarified, there is a qualitative difference between the advocates for .brands as a use case for SRSU, and advocates for .ngos as a use case for SRSU.
> 
> The first appears to be with the informed consent of the beneficiaries of the policy advocated, the later does not.

so I have spoke to people privately about their interest.  i am not going to give names of those who might be considering an application if there is such an exception.  but if there was some public interest for it as a class of applicants that I could see on the NCSG list.

The claim, you see, is that some organization of  brand owners have blessed the cause of .brand, but the organization ngo's (i know what organization) have not blessed the cause of .ngo.  

at this point i am fighting the removal of .ngo from the document as a possible exception.

a.



On 20 Jul 2010, at 12:06, Mary Wong wrote:

> Oh dear, now I'm (even more) puzzled and concerned by what's going on in the VI WG ...
>  
> Are there folks in the WG who think that the issue of whether Single Registrant TLDs *should* be permitted (i.e. a normative policy question) is at least partly dependent on whether members of particular Stakeholder Groups (in this case, NCSG) can *demonstrate* (a factual, not normative, question) whether there is PRESENT interest from its CURRENT membership in such a thing?
>  
> Or is this some attempt to "measure" whether the interest in Single Registrant TLDs is coming ONLY from the commercial (e.g. IP/brand, business) sectors?
>  
> Mary
>  
> Mary W S Wong
> Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs
> Franklin Pierce Law Center
> Two White Street
> Concord, NH 03301
> USA
> Email: mwong at piercelaw.edu
> Phone: 1-603-513-5143
> Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
> Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
> 
> 
> >>>
> From:Avri Doria <avri at LTU.SE>
> To:<NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
> Date:7/20/2010 10:59 AM
> Subject:Single Registrant TLD
> Hi,
> 
> Just checking.
> 
> The contention by some on the VIWG has been that I am deluded when I argue that the NCSG, especially some of its institutional members have no interest in seeing Single Registrant TLD (.ngo for want of a better name) where the names could be distributed internally, without use of a registrar, to employees or members.
> 
> Can anyone confirm my delusion?  Are their institutional members who think this sort of thing should exist - even if their name in not a famous brand?
> 
> thanks
> 
> a.
> 
> 
> <IMAGE.jpg>



Pierce Law | University of New Hampshire - An Innovative Partnership
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100720/87491574/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IMAGE.jpg
Type: image/jpg
Size: 14408 bytes
Desc: JPEG image
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100720/87491574/attachment.jpg>