[NCSG-Discuss] Closed Generics [proposals]

[clarinette]

Bringing to your attention:
"Ron Paul, former Representative and candidate for U.S. President, has
filed a complaint with ICANN <http://www.icann.org/> over ownership of the
domain names ronpaul.com and ronpaul.org, currently owned by Ron Paul
supporters. Dr. Paul says the current owners should give up the names
because he has a common law trademark on his name. There is some dispute
over whether the owners offered to sell Dr. Paul the names and if so, for
what sum. More here
<http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/11/ron-paul-files-suit-for-domain-name-leaving-supporters-bummed-but-fighting/>from
FoxNews, here<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/10/ron-paul-copyright_n_2658825.html>from
the Huffington Post. "

On 27 February 2013 08:46, Maria Farrell <maria.farrell at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hosting a discussion in Beijing would be a great idea. People are eager to
> debate it so would come to our meeting.
>
> What do we need to do to make it happen..?
>
> Maria
>
>
> On 27 February 2013 06:14, Dan Krimm <dan at musicunbound.com> wrote:
>
>> As I absorb the two sides of this discussion (seeing merits in both) I'm
>> finding myself wanting a more conceptual framework in which to evaluate
>> the
>> points.
>>
>> Technically, a domain (TLD) is a domain (2LD) is a domain (3LD).  [Point
>> Milton]
>>
>> Administratively, different levels have different agents of control.  It
>> seems to me that in one sense the *control* is the important thing.  Who
>> gets to determine who gets to have/control one of these, at whatever
>> level?
>> [Point Kathy]
>>
>> If TLDs were ubiquitous (following their being cheap and easy to set up)
>> it
>> wouldn't matter so much who controlled one string or another because there
>> would be robust competition and alternatives.  Milton's stance would be
>> supported by real non-scarcity in TLDs.
>>
>> In fact, though, even though TLDs are being opened up from near stasis,
>> the
>> barrier to entry of application fee and the simple fact of finite
>> administrative bandwidth in processing applications means that there will
>> still be some degree of meaningful scarcity in the system for the
>> foreseeable future.
>>
>> In that case, is there a strategic advantage (economic/political) in
>> getting the string before someone else?  (Especially if alternatives are
>> not easy to come by -- like if .book exists, but not all those others like
>> .bks, etc.)  Seems there could be, and that should be a practical
>> consideration even if in principle it ought to be moot.
>>
>> Or it could *all* be moot if no one really uses domains to discover web
>> sites anymore.  What is the real, practical economic/political value of
>> controlling a TLD?  [Point Andrew]
>>
>> Some points here are contingent upon contingencies of current TLD policy
>> --
>> in principle they could be mooted by a more global change in policy, but
>> that more global change in policy may not be realistically forthcoming
>> given the quango-mire that is ICANN.
>>
>> So, what I'd love to see is a tracing of a dependency-structure for
>> current
>> and proposed policies.
>>
>> I'm nowhere near working this out comprehensively myself, but would love
>> to
>> see those more experienced with the situation in the long term do so, if
>> possible.
>>
>> I think Pro/Con can lead us toward this (sort of a case-study discovery
>> process), but I don't think it will get us all the way there by itself.
>> Not to discourage it at all, but maybe let's aim further too, yes?
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> PS: Regrettably, I can't be present at any forthcoming in-person meetings,
>> Beijing or otherwise.  But, I can occasionally get to email when I have a
>> passing opportunity.  Maybe I can offer some questions/comments along the
>> way as the discussion develops.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and
>> do
>> not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer.
>>
>>
>>
>> At 12:41 PM +0100 2/26/13, Avri Doria wrote:
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >I think this is a great idea, and something that would best be done by
>> >someone who was not partisan on the issue.
>> >
>> >Where you offering?
>> >
>> >avri
>> >
>> >On 26 Feb 2013, at 12:20, Clarinettet wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> May I submit one easy suggestion. Obviously, as every option, there are
>> >>pros and cons. To adopt a common position, we need to balance the pros
>> >>and cons. I suggest a worksheet to be created with two columns
>> >>representing each side's views and vote from there. That way, everyone
>> >>can validity judge and discuss. It's not very easy to follow discussions
>> >>on series of emails.
>> >>
>> >> Do you agree?
>> >>
>> >> Tara Taubman
>>
>
>


-- 
Internet & Privacy Lawyer - LLM
Keep the internet safe
http://FlyAKite.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20130227/a0f99494/attachment-0001.html>