Re: Thread 5: Defining the namespace

[Daniel Kaplan <dkaplan@terra-nova.fr>]

At 10:17 AM +0200 12/26/96, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>> The initial seven gTLD's will be specified by IAHC. Comments from the
>> Internet communityand other stakeholders in response to this specific
>>proposal
>> will be considered.
>>
>> Ideas: .iway, .inet, .cyber, .home, .ppl, .inter

And Simon Higgs answered:
>Mmmmm... The equation is broken. The only one that stands out as valid
>is .HOME. The problem with the other examples is that they fail to
>divide the name space in a meaningful way. .COM, .EDU, and ISO-3166
>domains are distinct divisions. The above examples are all nearly
>identical. Maybe you could help by defining the types of registrations
>that would go under each one as they appear to have zero value other
>than to confuse the consumer and cause more trademark infringements.

Very important discussion here.
I totally disagree with Simon, because (i) I don't see why the issue 
should be to 'divide the name space in a meaningful way' and (ii) any 
predefined 'meaningful' way which I've read about assumes that if it's 
meaningful in English, it works for the whole world. It doesn't and 
what's more, it shouldn't.

Hank's trial is interesting (except, maybe, "home"...), because it refers 
to terms which have come to generically design the Internet or important 
usages of the Internet. Granted, they mostly have their origin in the 
English language, but they have reached some global legitimity.

Forgive me for quoting from our "position paper", but it may provide some 
food for thought on these issues:
-- Start quoting --
5- MUST WE PREDEFINE WHICH iTLDs WILL BE CREATED ?
Maybe in the short run, not in the long run.
5.1- In the short run:
- We believe the expansion of iTLDs should be an experimental process, 
and undergo 
  continuous reviews of its consequences and possible drawbacks;
- The first new iTLDs to be created could refer to very generic 
categories, for 
  which we feel that the Internet community has a right to predefine a 
rather 
  stringent set of rules (a charter) to be enforced by registries.
5.2- In the long run:
- We will always fail to properly map the naming universe. It can only 
properly map
  itself by a continuous trial and error (or "sort-of-free-market") 
process;
- Prior mapping of the naming universe, eg by using WIPO trademark 
categories:
  * neglects the fact that not only trademarks are protected (there can 
be 
    protection for artistic works, for "famous" persons names, etc.);
  * neglects diversity in the way names are protected in the various 
countries
    of the world;
  * will probably neglect the fact that not everybody speaks English in 
the world.

6- HOW SHOULD iTLDs BE CREATED IN THE LONG RUN?
[...]
6.5- Two kinds of new iTLDs may be proactively created by IANA [or IAHC], 
with stringent charters designed in order to ensure maximum efficiency 
for the Internet community:
- "Generic" iTLDs which designate a common resource of the Internet (eg, 
.WEB, 
  .WWW, .MAIL, .NEWS...)
- Some iTLDs reserved for non-profit organizations.
One of the provisions enclosed in the charter for those iTLDs should be a 
low price-cap for registrations, or a profit-cap for registries.
-- end quoting --

Daniel


-------------------------------------------
Daniel Kaplan         dkaplan@terra-nova.fr
Consultant - Media & Commerce Electroniques
           - Electronic  Media  &  Commerce
61 rue Monge   -   75005 Paris   -   France
Tel/Fax +33 (0)1 4217 0754 GSM 06 0981 0377
-------------------------------------------