Re: Fallacy of hindsight again (was something else)

[David Collier-Brown <davecb@Canada.Sun.COM>]

Carl Oppedahl wrote:
> > The beneficiaries of the waiting period are not only the (estimated by you)
> > 4,000 who would have had trademark challenges, but also the other 796,000
> > who (we can later say in hindsight) did not.  All of them turn out to have
> > had enhanced stability.

Vince Wolodkin wrote:> 
> Well, as someone who registers domain names, I don't want your precious
> stability.  This is intrusive.  If I wish to do a trademark search and
> take my chances and I have lawyers, I don't think we need you or the
> IAHC telling us they know better than we do.

  I'd agree with you if I had realtime international trademark searches
running. Alas, I don't.

  I think we're seeing a response to the probability that search
bredth and the propogation time for court cases (:-)) would make the
domain name allocation process **fail to scale**.

  In an organization which has paid a lot of attention to scaling
issues, consideration of this is entirely reasonable (phew!)
  This makes the waiting/publication period an engineering
compromise, rather than an axiom.

   I'm a canadian: I grok compromise.  

--dave (on good days I'm an engineeer, too.  Sometimes) c-b
-- 
David Collier-Brown,  | Always do right. This will gratify some people
185 Ellerslie Ave.,   | astonish the rest.        -- Mark Twain
Willowdale, Ontario   | davecb@hobbes.ss.org, canada.sun.com
N2M 1Y3. 416-223-8968 | http://java.science.yorku.ca/~davecb