Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1469
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST         Saturday, October 12 2002         Volume 01 : Number 1469

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:08:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:

> WANNA BET!? I DID READ IT, several times over, by the way, so don't "ditto"
> me!

Alas, you read it quite carelessly.

> 
> 
> "   ORG - This domain is intended as the miscellaneous TLD for
>          organizations that didn't fit anywhere else.  Some non-
>          government organizations may fit here.

PLEASE NOTE THE UTTER ABSCENCE OF THE WORDS "ONLY" AND "NON-PROFIT" IN THE
ABOVE. IT ISN'T ONLY FOR NON-PROFITS.  ITS FOR "ORGANIZATIONS" -- THAT IS
A VERY BROAD TERM IN AMERICAN ENGLISH.

Sorry about the shouting, but really.

I would give a failing mark to any student that made this error.
Especially as the subject has been discussed online in myriad fora for
many years.  "Miscellaneous" is the key word here...

> >
> > At 6:53 PM -0500 10/10/02, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
> > >and that the .ORG domain name is only for
> > >non-profit organizations
> >
> > Where did you get this from?
> >
> > --
> > Andrew P. Gardner
> > barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
> > We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
> > Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> 
> 

- -- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   [email-masked]
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                      -->It's very hot here.<--

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:09:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz

You might care to read the extensive critique of ICP-1 and the queries as
to ICANN's authority to operate in this high-handed way.

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:

> You might care to read RFC-1591 and ICP-1. 
> 
> Atentamente, Regards
> Rodrigo Orenday Serratos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Andy Gardner [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Enviado el: Jueves, 10 de Octubre de 2002 07:05 PM
> Para: [email-masked]; 'Dan Steinberg'
> CC: 'Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law'; 'Leah Gallegos';
> [email-masked]
> Asunto: RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz
> 
> 
> At 6:53 PM -0500 10/10/02, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
> >and that the .ORG domain name is only for
> >non-profit organizations
> 
> Where did you get this from?
> 
> 

- -- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   [email-masked]
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                      -->It's very hot here.<--

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:24:13 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Security

Layers and doors,

When you build layers, upon layers, upon layers you must add the layers
of security within that same framework.
The same holds true in physical and digital worlds.  Each floor of a
secured building must be secured, separately from the other, both for
fire (virus) and intrusion (hacking).

Now the IPv6 may even be better than the IPv4 but we have the technology
and understanding to make it more secure by adding another layer of
security.

When I speak of security, and while I have no antagonism toward Jim and
Joe, I do refer to privacy as I see them as one and the same.  We have
locked the front door in IPv4 but in IPv6 we have built a sliding glass
door onto the patio and have not provided the extra security we need
with this new capability to fire and intrusion.
Maybe it is only a peeping Tom,  but, a lock stops an honest man and
window shades prevent innocent voyeurism.

Sincerely,
e

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 12:37:32 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Generics [Was RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz]

At 12:20 PM -0500 10/11/02, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
>The case you mention concerns the use of force (in spite of which there
>would be little concern for license plates and taxes)  in international
>public law and is a totally unrelated subject.
>
>Stick to the point.

OK. How about you answer some of the questions I put to you in previous
postings?

Do you advocate voiding the registration of mercadolibre.com.mx because
it's a generic term?

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 11:15:31 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz

Dear esteemed and Knowledgeable Dr. Froomkin,

You give us a startling example of truth as in words and the opposite.
Truth as in practice.  I hate to pull you from your Ivory tower office where only
scheduled appointements are accepted.  Rodrigo is quite correct as to practice.
What do you suggest?  We only live in theory and the rule that is seldom
followed.  this is a good way to get young soldiers slaughtered and young
attorneys creamed in court.
Just a thought from a practising strategist.
You know I respect your wisdom and have learned greatly form your wisdom.
e

"Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
>
> > WANNA BET!? I DID READ IT, several times over, by the way, so don't "ditto"
> > me!
>
> Alas, you read it quite carelessly.
>
> >
> >
> > "   ORG - This domain is intended as the miscellaneous TLD for
> >          organizations that didn't fit anywhere else.  Some non-
> >          government organizations may fit here.
>
> PLEASE NOTE THE UTTER ABSCENCE OF THE WORDS "ONLY" AND "NON-PROFIT" IN THE
> ABOVE. IT ISN'T ONLY FOR NON-PROFITS.  ITS FOR "ORGANIZATIONS" -- THAT IS
> A VERY BROAD TERM IN AMERICAN ENGLISH.
>
> Sorry about the shouting, but really.
>
> I would give a failing mark to any student that made this error.
> Especially as the subject has been discussed online in myriad fora for
> many years.  "Miscellaneous" is the key word here...
>
> > >
> > > At 6:53 PM -0500 10/10/02, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
> > > >and that the .ORG domain name is only for
> > > >non-profit organizations
> > >
> > > Where did you get this from?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew P. Gardner
> > > barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
> > > We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
> > > Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
>                 Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
> A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   [email-masked]
> U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
> +1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
>                       -->It's very hot here.<--
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:35:11 -0500
From: "Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Generics [Was RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz]

Perhaps; it's not only generic, but also descriptive of their services.
However it may be considered to be sufficently distinctive as a service mark
by some instances.

Atentamente, Regards
Rodrigo Orenday Serratos

- -----Mensaje original-----
De: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]En nombre de Andy
Gardner
Enviado el: Viernes, 11 de Octubre de 2002 12:38 PM
Para: [email-masked]
Asunto: RE: Generics [Was RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re:
NewZealand.biz]

At 12:20 PM -0500 10/11/02, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
>The case you mention concerns the use of force (in spite of which there
>would be little concern for license plates and taxes)  in international
>public law and is a totally unrelated subject.
>
>Stick to the point.

OK. How about you answer some of the questions I put to you in previous
postings?

Do you advocate voiding the registration of mercadolibre.com.mx because
it's a generic term?

- --
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:53:31 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Generics [Was RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz]

At 1:35 PM -0500 10/11/02, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
>Perhaps; it's not only generic, but also descriptive of their services.
>However it may be considered to be sufficently distinctive as a service mark
>by some instances.

So first you say it's generic, but they you say you might allow it to be
registered as a mark, because it's descriptive?

<head shake>Okaaaaaaay.</head shake>

Plonk!

For those of you not versed in Spanish, "mercado libre" is "free market".
mercadolibre.com.mx is eBay's Mexican portal.

First Señor Rodrigo wants to delete the registration because it's generic,
now he wants to award them a service mark.

I think he and Jeff (and all the little voices in Jeff's head) will become
good friends.

>Atentamente, Regards
>Rodrigo Orenday Serratos
>
>
>
>-----Mensaje original-----
>De: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]En nombre de Andy
>Gardner
>Enviado el: Viernes, 11 de Octubre de 2002 12:38 PM
>Para: [email-masked]
>Asunto: RE: Generics [Was RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re:
>NewZealand.biz]
>
>
>At 12:20 PM -0500 10/11/02, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
>>The case you mention concerns the use of force (in spite of which there
>>would be little concern for license plates and taxes)  in international
>>public law and is a totally unrelated subject.
>>
>>Stick to the point.
>
>OK. How about you answer some of the questions I put to you in previous
>postings?
>
>Do you advocate voiding the registration of mercadolibre.com.mx because
>it's a generic term?
>
>
>--
>Andrew P. Gardner
>barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
>We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
>Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
>--
>This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
>Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 21:35:08 +0200
From: Alexander Svensson <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] FYI: ITU press release on IDN resolution

>ITU stakes claim on Internet names
>
>The Working Group of the Plenary approved a resolution on the management 
>of internationalized multilingual domain names. This resolution aims at 
>promoting the role of Member States in the internationalization of domain 
>names and addresses of their respective languages. This will be increasingly 
>important in the coming years as a majority of Internet users is expected 
>to prefer to conduct online activities in their own language. It is also 
>important because the current Domain Names System (DNS) mapping does not 
>reflect the growing language needs of all. The resolution stresses that 
>the registration and allocation of Internet domain names and addresses 
>should reflect the geographical and functional nature of the Internet with 
>an equitable balance of interests of all stakeholders. It also emphasizes 
>that the non-discriminatory access to Internet domain names and addresses, 
>and more generally to the Internet, should be available to all citizens 
>and that the management of Internet Domain Names and addresses is of 
>concern to both governments and the private sector. It also reiterates 
>the need to fully maintain country code numbering plans and addresses as 
>in ITU-T recommendation E.164 which defines the international public 
>telecommunication numbering plan. Under this resolution, ITU will be 
>providing assistance to its Member States to promote the use of their 
>languages for domain names and addresses and will cooperate with the 
>World Intellectual Property Organization whose role includes protection
>against misuse of intellectual property rights in the use of countries’ 
>languages for domain names and addresses.
(http://www.itu.int/newsroom/pp02/Highlights/1010.html)

Best regards,
/// Alexander

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:34:10 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] [Fwd: [Anuncios] AC/ASO Nominations]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- --------------F2C1CFD8BABCE9D07220C6D1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

this is important stuff -- I think
e

- --------------F2C1CFD8BABCE9D07220C6D1
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline

From: [email-masked]
To: <[email-masked]>
Importance: Normal
Subject: [Anuncios] AC/ASO Nominations
Sender: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:16:50 -0300

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0066_01C27139.390504E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

LACNIC anuncia que en el día de ayer, 10 de Octubre de 2002,  venció el
plazo para enviar apoyos a los candidatos nominados para el Address Council
del ASO. Toda la información acerca de los candidatos y los apoyos recibidos
hasta el día de ayer, se encuentra en nuestra página:
http://lacnic.net/sp/nominees.html

LACNIC announces that the reception of supports to the nominated candidates
for the ASO´s Address Council was due yesterday, October 10th, 2002.
Information about the candidates and supports received until yesterday is
available in our web page:  http://lacnic.net/sp/nominees.html

- ------=_NextPart_000_0066_01C27139.390504E0
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef;
	name="winmail.dat"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="winmail.dat"

- ------=_NextPart_000_0066_01C27139.390504E0--

_______________________________________________
Anuncios mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.lacnic.org/mailman/listinfo/anuncios

- --------------F2C1CFD8BABCE9D07220C6D1--

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:43:21 -0500
From: "Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Generics [Was RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz]

Don't put words in my mouth; I would not award them a mark registration;
what I said was that some other instances might. Period.

I beleive I've reached my posting limit, so I'll just quit arguing for
today. Enjoy the long weekend.

Atentamente, Regards
Rodrigo Orenday Serratos

- -----Mensaje original-----
De: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]En nombre de Andy
Gardner
Enviado el: Viernes, 11 de Octubre de 2002 01:54 PM
Para: [email-masked]
Asunto: RE: Generics [Was RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re:
NewZealand.biz]

At 1:35 PM -0500 10/11/02, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
>Perhaps; it's not only generic, but also descriptive of their services.
>However it may be considered to be sufficently distinctive as a service
mark
>by some instances.

So first you say it's generic, but they you say you might allow it to be
registered as a mark, because it's descriptive?

<head shake>Okaaaaaaay.</head shake>

Plonk!

For those of you not versed in Spanish, "mercado libre" is "free market".
mercadolibre.com.mx is eBay's Mexican portal.

First Señor Rodrigo wants to delete the registration because it's generic,
now he wants to award them a service mark.

I think he and Jeff (and all the little voices in Jeff's head) will become
good friends.

>Atentamente, Regards
>Rodrigo Orenday Serratos
>
>
>
>-----Mensaje original-----
>De: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]En nombre de Andy
>Gardner
>Enviado el: Viernes, 11 de Octubre de 2002 12:38 PM
>Para: [email-masked]
>Asunto: RE: Generics [Was RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re:
>NewZealand.biz]
>
>
>At 12:20 PM -0500 10/11/02, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
>>The case you mention concerns the use of force (in spite of which there
>>would be little concern for license plates and taxes)  in international
>>public law and is a totally unrelated subject.
>>
>>Stick to the point.
>
>OK. How about you answer some of the questions I put to you in previous
>postings?
>
>Do you advocate voiding the registration of mercadolibre.com.mx because
>it's a generic term?
>
>
>--
>Andrew P. Gardner
>barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
>We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
>Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
>--
>This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
>Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:02:07 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] GA & the Steady State Future

Ok,

Twice in one day that I applaud people for their contributions.
Very well written synopses here Thomas.
I hope this disease is not long lasting.
This should be archived as a state of the GA paper from a chairs' point of
view.
e

Thomas Roessler wrote:

> On 2002-10-10 16:17:09 +0200, ADD-CT wrote:
>
> >excuse my ignorance: I arrived to this list searching the way to
> >belongs or participate in ICANN.
>
> ... and you are very much welcome.
>
> >If you click on "participate in ICANN" (www.icann.org), you will
> >go to www.dnso.icann.org and, from there, to "mailing lists". At
> >this point, I don't know what to think.  Am I a member of the
> >ICANN? Or a member of DNSO? Or only a member of this mailing list?
>
> Well, ICANN doesn't have members, technically.  (And I'll get a
> follow-up from Karl Auerbach in which he'll dispute the effectivity
> of these bylaw provisions in view of the CNPPBL, or however that law
> is abbreviated.)
>
> The DNSO (which has two analogues, the ASO and the PSO) is built up
> out of a number of distinct "constituencies": Business users,
> Non-Commercial Users, Intellectual Property Interests, ISPs,
> Registrars, Registries, and ccTLDs.  In addition to that, there's
> this mailing list, the General Assembly, which also corresponds to a
> "plenary session" at ICANN physical meetings.
>
> Much of the work in the DNSO is supposed to happen on the Names
> Council (where the constituencies are represented) and in Working
> Groups (nowadays: closed Task Forces, consisting of constituency
> representatives).
>
> The GA is supposed to be a forum for intelligent discussion of DNSO
> issues, and for consensus-building.  In the past, it has also
> regularly sent participants to the various Task Forces (who have,
> at times, been very active). The chair and co-chair have been
> regularly participating in Names Council telephone conferences.
>
> In the reformed future ICANN, the DNSO will be renamed GNSO, the
> ccTLDs are going to get their own Supporting Organization.  There
> will be a new "Policy Development Process" which will replace the
> current task force model.
>
> The future GNSO won't have a formal "General Assembly" according to
> the current plans, and the participation in new-style Task Forces
> thus won't be open for individual participants.  Public
> participation will have to go through a beast called ALAC (At-Large
> Advisory Committee).  I hope that it will be possible to persuade
> the board that ALAC participation in the policy-development process
> is a good idea.
>
> Abolishing the notion of a "General Assembly" (in the current
> bylaws, the GA is almost the incarnation of the DNSO as a whole)
> does not mean that this mailing list will stop to exist, and it also
> does not mean that it won't continue to be read by an astonishing
> number of people.  After all, it's the best discussion forum we have
> for ICANN matters, alongside, maybe, with the NCDNHC's discussion
> list.
>
> Now, what to do if you want to participate beyond that?  If you can,
> join one of the existing constituencies.  If you're just an
> individual participant (like me), look out for the ALAC's future
> activities, or try to contribute some more reason to the folks at
> icannatlarge.com.  When there's an opportunity and you feel
> interested in and knowledgeable on some topic, try to join a task
> force.  (I don't know how that'll work in the future, though - I
> just hope that it will continue to be possible.)
>
> When you believe that you have a valuable comment to make on some
> topic, make it.  Frequently, you'll be ignored, but occasionally, it
> actually works.
>
> PS: There's one web site you should _really_ visit daily. That's
> Bret Fausett's icann.blog.us.  Besides that, you may also wish to
> take an occasional look at icannwatch.org, and at my own blog (see
> .sig).  If you understand German, I'd also recommend Alexander
> Svensson's icannchannel.de.
>
> --
> Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.INFO/
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 18:04:43 -0400
From: "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Generics [Was RE: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz]

> >No, it is the title of a song, composed and recorded in 1959 by
saxophonist
> >Chuck Rio.
> > Is it illegal to play it on Mexican radio?

> It's not illegal to play it here; actually it was used in the campaign of
> Jose Cuervo Tequila last year's summer.

Then can I also write a book entitled "Tequila" and sell that book?

What if I then wanted to make a website about my book?  Can I register
tequila.info and put up a website having information about my book entitled
"Tequila"?

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 18:23:40 -0400
From: "The Mullah" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz

> The Mullah says:
>
> > Domain name registrars should be required only to recognize truly
> > legitimate countries.
>
> unfortunately, a lot of countries has been legitimated after an unjust
> war.
> Will we legitimate the war? Do we want to convert the Internet in a
> replica of the stupid organization of the 'real' world?

As Mr. Serrato advises, we must ensure that only sovereign countries are the
ones which control who should be able to register the names of sovereign
countries, then of course we can only recognize the "real" countries.

Someone will have to be in charge of deciding what is or is not a country.
Someone else will have to be in charge of deciding the names of the real
countries.  For example "Germany" is not a country - "Deutschland" is a
country.   Just because English-speakers call "Deutschland" as "Germany" does
not make "Germany" the name of that country.  So, anyone can register
"Germany", but Mr. Serrato wants "Deutschland" to be reserved for the
government of that country.  Mr. Serrato can clarify the rule that is so
clear to him, if I have misunderstood him.

Of course, there are countries whose official names cannot be written in
ASCII, so those countries we do not need to worry about.  That includes most
Asian countries.  There is no final standard for chinese domain names, for
example, so China does not get a domain name.  Unless of course, you want to
say that English is the official language of the world, and the Roman
alphabet is the official alphabet of the world.  Then we will make Mr.
Serrato's rule to apply to the English names of the "real" countries as
written in the Roman alphabet.  Mr. Serrato, of course, will have to abandon
attempts to use his native alphabet, which includes things like "ll" as a
single letter (which is absurd), and "n" with a tilde over it (which probably
only his linguistic co-travelers know how to coax out of a normal 110 key
keyboard).

Israel is not a legitimate country, and their name is in the Hebrew script,
so that is two strikes against them.

"CT" is the state of Connecticut in the United States.  So of course you
cannot use it for your land, which is inside of another country already.

We will also put Mr. Serrato in charge of things such as who controls the
island of Cyprus and the Falkland Islands, so that he can determine who
should control the domain names.  Of course, we could give falklands.com to
the UK, and give malvinas.com to the Argentinas, and then quietly hope they
don't notice.

In any event, the rules for determining (a) what is a country, (b) what is
the name of a country, are very clear to Mr. Serrato, so he will be able to
make these decisions very simply.

Fortunately, even though we are having a hard time with finding new caves to
hide in, we are very happy with our domain name.

Regards,

Mullah Omar
[email-masked]

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:57:44 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz

On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 01:08:48PM -0400, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Rodrigo  Orenday Serrato wrote:
> 
>> WANNA BET!? I DID READ IT, several times over, by the way, so don't "ditto"
>> me!
> 
> Alas, you read it quite carelessly.
> 
>> 
>> 
>> "   ORG - This domain is intended as the miscellaneous TLD for
>>          organizations that didn't fit anywhere else.  Some non-
>>          government organizations may fit here.
> 
> 
> PLEASE NOTE THE UTTER ABSCENCE OF THE WORDS "ONLY" AND "NON-PROFIT" IN THE
> ABOVE. IT ISN'T ONLY FOR NON-PROFITS.  ITS FOR "ORGANIZATIONS" -- THAT IS
> A VERY BROAD TERM IN AMERICAN ENGLISH.

Sorry, that is irrelevant, and worse, misleading.  It says "...that
didn't fit anywhere else", and .com is specifically for commercial
entities.  Since all commercial entities "fit" in .com, it follows that 
.org is for entities that are non-commercial.  

Admittedly there is a distinction between "non-commercial" and
"non-profit", but in casual conversation that distinction is not
important. 

> Sorry about the shouting, but really.

Yes, shouting is bad form, and genrally indicates that the one shouting 
has a weak argument.

> I would give a failing mark to any student that made this error.

The arrogance of academia...

> Especially as the subject has been discussed online in myriad fora for
> many years.  "Miscellaneous" is the key word here...

No, actually, "didn't fit elsewhere" is the key.
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 18:20:13 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz

At 3:57 PM -0700 10/11/02, [email-masked] wrote:

>Sorry, that is irrelevant, and worse, misleading.  It says "...that
>didn't fit anywhere else", and .com is specifically for commercial
>entities.  Since all commercial entities "fit" in .com, it follows that
>.org is for entities that are non-commercial.

No, you don't understand the term "didn't fit".

My ficticious company "skateboards" "didn't fit" in .com because someone
else had registered skateboards.com prior. So I went for skateboards.org
instead.

That's the way's it's been. Verisign/NSI marketing will back me up on this,
I'm sure. Archives of their marketing material sure will.

And I always thought .com was supposed to be for communists. Boy! Don't I
look stupid!

I guess you're now gonna tell me that .coop isn't for chickens?

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1469
*************************