Re: Re[2]: IAHC Proposal (Attacks Thereon)

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 4:30 PM -0500 1/13/97, Carl Oppedahl wrote:

> At 04:00 PM 01/13/97 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:
>
> >Carl Oppedahl allegedly said:
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >> How many domain names are there?  Seven hundred thousand?  That's how big
> >> the problem is, if their domain names aren't sufficiently secure against
> >> loss to covetous parties.
> >
> >The goal of the 60 day wait is to reduce litigation.  Therefore, the
> >size of the problem is precisely the amount of litigation, that is,
> >the dozen of so cases that we know about.  The number of consultations
> >and inquiries you or anybody else has had is far, far less significant
> >than the number of lawsuits.  To see this, consider the case where
> >there were zero lawsuits, and lots of consultations.
>
> I am sorry to say this, but you are quite mistaken as to the goal.  The
> goal is to promote stability of URLs (and domain names).
>

That goal is a BIG mistake. Promoting stability still encourages
trademark holders to "stabilize" their marks on the net using lawsuits
and other legally-based tactics.

The real goal *MUST BE* to reduce name conflicts by the carefull design
of the name space. This protects nearly all names and marks, reduces
litigation, and as a result produces a stable domain name environment.

If the IAHC *MUST* address the right set of goals.


Regards,

Simon

--
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.