Re: Who really benefits from 60-day period?

[Vince Wolodkin <wolodkin@digitalink.com>]

Carl Oppedahl wrote:
> 
> At 01:41 PM 01/08/97 -0500, Vince Wolodkin wrote:
> 
> >In other words we protect ourselves.  Now, the internet is a fast paced
> >place.  Time to market is everything.  Entire products here have gone
> >from inspiration to fully functional website with advertisers or
> >advertiser sponsorship or user fees or whatever in well less than 60
> >days.
> >
> >In fact, during much of the development of a product the name has not
> >yet been determined.  Once determined, we do what we can to protect
> >ourselves and would defend ourselves as necessary in court, but it would
> >in the end be a business decision.  My point is, 60 days is far to long
> >to wait for a domain name. As we say here, 60 days is nearly 2 whole
> >"web years".  That's how fast things develop out on the net these days.
> >Slow companies get beaten to market.
> 
> So what's wrong with a third-level or fourth-level domain?  You can set
> that up instantly.

I can set a 2LD up instantly at InterNIC.  Back in .com.  Remember, to
be effective, these new gTLDs have to offer some incentive to come out
of .com.  Waiting 60 days for a domain name doesn't provide much
incentive.  I could probably live with 15 days.  Any longer than that
seems to likely to drive many possible registrants away.

Is there any existing precedents for this.  Have judges ruled against
orgs that use to small a waiting period?  I would really like to hear
from the IAHC members who decided 60 days was appropriate.

Vince Wolodkin