Re: [DNS] What's in a name? Too little, says panel

Re: [DNS] What's in a name? Too little, says panel

From: Patrick Corliss <patrick§quad.net.au>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 08:35:25 +1100
Meliza Smith <smithm&#167;callawrie.com.au> wrote:

> I think Doug meant generic TMs like "Soap" for washing powder, rather than
> generic words used on unrelated goods like "Tide" for washing powder.  I
> agree, we have to know what AUDa means by "generic". Is there any indication
> of this in the report?

Hi Meliza

    http://www.auda.org.au/panel/name/papers/publicreport.html.

The report's main reference to "generic" is in section 4.2 "Names wirh Fences:
Restricted Names".  There are two alternative proposals as follows:

4.2.1 Restriction on licensing of generic, geographic or objectionable names
Retain the current policy restricting the licensing of generic, geographic and
objectionable domain names and apply it across all open 2LDs.  Adopt a
"reserved list" approach to the restricted names [see the report for details].

4.2.2 Licensing of generic and geographic domain names.
Relax the current policy and enable licensing of generic and geographic domain
names using an appropriate licence allocation system, such as a market-based
one.

As far as a definition of terms, the report calls for clear definitions of
'generic', 'geographic' and 'objectionable' to be developed with reference to
appropriate sources (eg. Yellow Pages index).

In further discussion, the report says, among other things, that the first
proposal requires a definition of 'generic' which will be difficult to devise
and problematic to administer consistently across a range of competing
registrars.

In fact, the current policy defines these terms, at least to some degree, but
any such definition draws a line between what's "in" and what's "out" which,
as the
report acknowledges, inevitably gives rise to disputes which need to be
adjudicated.

As a start, I'd be interested in which of the above two options people favour.

Of course, it is also possible just to open it up completely to all applicants
on a "first come, first served" basis but this would invite the problems
experienced in the global TLD space of all names being snapped up by domain
name "investors".

Best regards
Patrick Corliss
Received on Tue Nov 21 2000 - 05:33:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Oct 30 2014 - 12:00:07 UTC