Re: Thread 2: 60-day issue

[Joe Kelsey <joe@zircon.seattle.wa.us>]

Simon Higgs writes:
 > > The difference is that a DBA applies to a LOCAL business and is granted
 > > by a STATE government of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. You are trying to
 > > take a local law and apply it internationally. If you insist on using
 > > DBA as an example of an instant domain name, then your DBA will have to
 > > be at least a 4LD: <dba>.com.<state>.us. (or maybe <dba>.com.us, but a
 > > corporation still has to register *within* a state, so I don't really
 > > see .com.us as happening any time soon.)  Nothing else makes sense as an
 > > *instant* domain name.
 > >
 > 
 > DBA is an example, not a direct mapping. DBA's are issued just like
 > domain names are right now. You apply, and can immediately use the
 > name. All a domain name is is an internet DBA mapped to a particular IP
 > address.

But you fail to see the difference. A DBA is granted by a *local* state
government and applies to doing business in the state you applied. It
has no relevance globally. If you want to do business globally (or even
nationally), then incorporate. Thus, an instant domain which is
*exactly* similar to DBA is a 3LD or a geographic name.

 > > There is, as far as I can see, no provable restraint of trade in
 > > requiring a 60-day waiting period, since perfectly valid alternatives
 > > exist to circumvent the period.
 > >
 > 
 > Like?

Michael Dillon's 3LD proposal. Geographic domain names.

/Joe