Slashdot Mirror

7. To obtain a place on the final ballot, an individual seeking member-nomination must meet the following conditions:

Support from 2% of the At Large Members in her/his geographic region, or 20 members, whichever is greater;

10% was undoubtedly too much to ask, so this means it will be easier to enter. So again, who is the /.er who wants to be At Large Director?

========== Section from ICANN minutes ===================

New Top-Level Domains

Whereas, the Domain Name Supporting Organization
(DNSO) has conducted a consensus-development process on the introduction
of new TLDs and the issues concerning the protection of famous trademarks
in the context of introduction of new TLDs;

Whereas, the Names Council of the DNSO made a
set of recommendations to the Board on 18/19 April 2000, including
the recommendation that the Board establish a policy for the introduction
of new gTLDs in a measured and responsible manner;

Whereas, the Names Council of the DNSO made a
second set of recommendations to the Board on 19 May 2000, which concerned
Famous Trademarks and the Operation of the DNS;

Whereas, the ICANN staff has posted a document
entitled "ICANN Yokohama Meeting Topic: Introduction of New Top-Level
Domains" on 13 June 2000 and sought public comment on the web
site concerning the Names Council recommendations and related issues;

Whereas, over 1,300 comments were received on
the ICANN web site in response to the staff posting;

Whereas, on 15 July 2000 a public forum was held
in Yokohama concerning the issues discussed in the staff paper;

Whereas, the Names Council recommendations were
transmitted to the Protocol Supporting Organization and the Address
Supporting Organization for their comment regarding the implications
on activities within their scopes of primary responsibility;

Whereas, no negative comment was received from
either Supporting Organization;

Resolved [00.46], that the Board hereby adopts
the Names Council's recommendation that a policy be established for
the introduction of new TLDs in a measured and responsible manner.

Resolved [00.47], that the President is authorized
to implement this policy according to the following schedule, which
the President may adjust if necessary to accommodate circumstances
that arise:

• 1 August 2000 - ICANN to issue a formal call
  for proposals by those seeking to sponsor or operate one or more
  new TLDs, accompanied by a New TLD Registry Application Form, instructions
  for filling out the application, and a statement of criteria for
  the Board's eventual decision.
  
• 1 October 2000 - Deadline for ICANN's receipt
  of applications. Portions of these applications deemed appropriate
  for publication for purposes of public comment or otherwise will
  be posted on ICANN's web site.
  
• 15 October 2000 - Close of period for public comments on proposals.
  
• 20 November 2000 - After approval by the Board,
  ICANN to announce selections for negotiations toward entry of agreements
  with registry sponsors and operators.
  
• 31 December 2000 - Target date for completion of negotiations.
  

Resolved [00.48], the President is authorized
to establish a non-refundable fee of USD $50,000 for the submission
of an application to become a sponsor or operator of a registry, which
the Board finds is a reasonable estimate of ICANN's costs likely to
be associated with receipt and evaluation of such applications, and
follow-up.

Resolved [00.49], in connection with applications,
the President should seek information that he determines is appropriate.
Without limiting the information that may be sought, the Board commends
to the President's consideration the data elements described in section
IV of the staff paper, and also notes that the data elements should
include:

• full information about the technical, business,
  management, and financial capabilities of the proposed operator
  of the registry;
  
• a detailed description of the policies contemplated
  to promote orderly registration of names in the initial phases of
  introduction of the TLD;
  
• full details concerning arrangements proposed
  to protect users in the event of registry failure; and
  
• measures proposed for minimizing use of the
  TLD to carry out infringements or other abuses of intellectual property
  rights.
  

Resolved [00.50], that the President is authorized
to establish guidelines for assessing which proposals to select for
negotiations toward entry of agreements with registry sponsors and
operators. The Board commends the following topics to the President
for inclusion in the guidelines:

• The need to maintain the Internet's stability,
  and especially the protection of domain-name holders from the effects
  of registry or registration-system failure.
  
• The extent to which selection of the proposal
  would lead to an effective "proof of concept" concerning
  the introduction of top-level domains in the future, including the
  diversity the proposal would bring to the program, such as fully
  open top level domains, restricted and chartered domains with limited
  scope, noncommercial domains, and personal domains; and a variety
  of business models and geographic locations.
  
• The enhancement of competition for registration services at the registry and registrar level.
  
• The enhancement of the utility of the DNS.
  
• The evaluation of delegation of policy-formulation functions for special-purpose TLDs to appropriate organizations.
  
• The extent to which the proposal would meet previously unmet types of needs.
  
• The importance of appropriate protections of rights of others, including intellectual property rights, in connection with the operation of the TLD, especially during the start-up phases.
  

Resolved [00.51], that the President is authorized to seek technical advice from appropriate individuals or organizations to assist the evaluation of proposals.

========================================

========== Section from ICANN minutes ===================

New Top-Level Domains

Whereas, the Domain Name Supporting Organization
(DNSO) has conducted a consensus-development process on the introduction
of new TLDs and the issues concerning the protection of famous trademarks
in the context of introduction of new TLDs;

Whereas, the Names Council of the DNSO made a
set of recommendations to the Board on 18/19 April 2000, including
the recommendation that the Board establish a policy for the introduction
of new gTLDs in a measured and responsible manner;

Whereas, the Names Council of the DNSO made a
second set of recommendations to the Board on 19 May 2000, which concerned
Famous Trademarks and the Operation of the DNS;

Whereas, the ICANN staff has posted a document
entitled "ICANN Yokohama Meeting Topic: Introduction of New Top-Level
Domains" on 13 June 2000 and sought public comment on the web
site concerning the Names Council recommendations and related issues;

Whereas, over 1,300 comments were received on
the ICANN web site in response to the staff posting;

Whereas, on 15 July 2000 a public forum was held
in Yokohama concerning the issues discussed in the staff paper;

Whereas, the Names Council recommendations were
transmitted to the Protocol Supporting Organization and the Address
Supporting Organization for their comment regarding the implications
on activities within their scopes of primary responsibility;

Whereas, no negative comment was received from
either Supporting Organization;

Resolved [00.46], that the Board hereby adopts
the Names Council's recommendation that a policy be established for
the introduction of new TLDs in a measured and responsible manner.

Resolved [00.47], that the President is authorized
to implement this policy according to the following schedule, which
the President may adjust if necessary to accommodate circumstances
that arise:

• 1 August 2000 - ICANN to issue a formal call
  for proposals by those seeking to sponsor or operate one or more
  new TLDs, accompanied by a New TLD Registry Application Form, instructions
  for filling out the application, and a statement of criteria for
  the Board's eventual decision.
  
• 1 October 2000 - Deadline for ICANN's receipt
  of applications. Portions of these applications deemed appropriate
  for publication for purposes of public comment or otherwise will
  be posted on ICANN's web site.
  
• 15 October 2000 - Close of period for public comments on proposals.
  
• 20 November 2000 - After approval by the Board,
  ICANN to announce selections for negotiations toward entry of agreements
  with registry sponsors and operators.
  
• 31 December 2000 - Target date for completion of negotiations.
  

Resolved [00.48], the President is authorized
to establish a non-refundable fee of USD $50,000 for the submission
of an application to become a sponsor or operator of a registry, which
the Board finds is a reasonable estimate of ICANN's costs likely to
be associated with receipt and evaluation of such applications, and
follow-up.

Resolved [00.49], in connection with applications,
the President should seek information that he determines is appropriate.
Without limiting the information that may be sought, the Board commends
to the President's consideration the data elements described in section
IV of the staff paper, and also notes that the data elements should
include:

• full information about the technical, business,
  management, and financial capabilities of the proposed operator
  of the registry;
  
• a detailed description of the policies contemplated
  to promote orderly registration of names in the initial phases of
  introduction of the TLD;
  
• full details concerning arrangements proposed
  to protect users in the event of registry failure; and
  
• measures proposed for minimizing use of the
  TLD to carry out infringements or other abuses of intellectual property
  rights.
  

Resolved [00.50], that the President is authorized
to establish guidelines for assessing which proposals to select for
negotiations toward entry of agreements with registry sponsors and
operators. The Board commends the following topics to the President
for inclusion in the guidelines:

• The need to maintain the Internet's stability,
  and especially the protection of domain-name holders from the effects
  of registry or registration-system failure.
  
• The extent to which selection of the proposal
  would lead to an effective "proof of concept" concerning
  the introduction of top-level domains in the future, including the
  diversity the proposal would bring to the program, such as fully
  open top level domains, restricted and chartered domains with limited
  scope, noncommercial domains, and personal domains; and a variety
  of business models and geographic locations.
  
• The enhancement of competition for registration services at the registry and registrar level.
  
• The enhancement of the utility of the DNS.
  
• The evaluation of delegation of policy-formulation functions for special-purpose TLDs to appropriate organizations.
  
• The extent to which the proposal would meet previously unmet types of needs.
  
• The importance of appropriate protections of rights of others, including intellectual property rights, in connection with the operation of the TLD, especially during the start-up phases.
  

Resolved [00.51], that the President is authorized to seek technical advice from appropriate individuals or organizations to assist the evaluation of proposals.

========================================

Have you read the "preliminary report" from ICANN? It reads worse than 75% of the cruft that comes out of the US Congress. What in the hell are they thinking? Are they so full of themselves that they feel that all the 'whereas' and 'be it resolved' BS is obligatory? That steaming pile of over-politicized, self-important, penis-extending, CRAP pisses me off more than anything else I've read on /. in weeks....

If ICANN can't even figure out where it is in the geo-world, can anyone expect them to get it right in the cyber-world?

Or, as Firesign Theater said:

How can you be in two places at once when you're really nowhere at all?

The ICANN site has now been updated. You can get the preliminary report of their little chat-party in Yokohama here.

We are sorry. The database is currently overloaded. Please try again later.

Maybe here's our form of protest.

Slashdot ICANN

2. You must provide your complete legal name and postal address in the membership application form. If your membership or vote is challenged as part of an At Large audit process, you must agree to furnish suitable documentation of your legal identity, address, country of residence, and age.

3. You must provide a valid Internet email address that is continuously active so that you can send and receive messages from ICANN and participate in its electronic forums.

Dear Mr Stallman,

In reference to your proposal for a .gnu TLD, we are currently examining rules and policies for extending the TLD namespace, not accepting individual applications for new TLDs. Rest assured your suggestion that we permit expansion of the namespace is being taken with all seriousness: indeed, I can go so far as to guarantee that we will not be considering any policies which reduce the existing namespace, and we would consider no change to be no progress.

On the other hand, although we are familiar with the Free Software Foundation and its not unsubstantial contribution to the public good in terms of free software, we would like some clarification on your proposal. We note that there are a substantial number of free software projects released by individuals and organisations other than the FSF, and although a substantial number of these identify with GNU in spirit, many do not. A number of questions arise from this.

1. Must software be released under the GPL specifically in order to qualify for a .gnu TLD name?
   1. If so, then why should the GPL be granted such special treatment compared to other licenses?
   2. If not, then what criteria do you propose?
   3. In either case, do you think it fair that other free licenses (such as BSD) will be either excluded or offered a GNU name, as opposed to having their own TLD?
2. Do you propose that all licenses be given their own TLD?
3. Why should free software be given such special treatment, when most such projects already have domain names in .com, .org, or .net? Why .gnu when you already have .gnu.org?

Your clarification on these issues will be appreciated.

Regards,
ICANN

If the ICANN board adopts a sponsorship model for special purpose TLDs, and a .gnu domain is authorized, then the FSF would likely gain a good deal of authority over registrations.

I think that Free and Open Source Software movments are taking up a good deal of the second-level name space, and predictably so, given the high level of net-savvy among FS and OSS advocates. Supporters of this type of development certainly span the spectrum from non-profit organizations through corporations and into academia. The creation of a TLD for FS/OSS would be a good courtesy to the rest of the world.

Notably, however, .gnu would be affiliated with RMS and his Free Software Movement. Second-level domains may very well be limited to sites that accept an FSF attitude connecting free software to free speech.

This would be another FSF-sponsored perk that encourages developers to endorse copyleft. Imagine: Gimp.gnu, gnome.gnu, emacs.gnu, and gcc.gnu all become well-known URLs. The FSF could offer a free second-level domain name in this special TLD to young developers who adopt FSF principles.

OSS advocates, BSD advocates, and others who view Stallman may be specifically excluded. They may want their own TLD -- and who knows, if RMS can get his, why can't ESR?

The creation of a .gnu TLD could:

(a) Consolidate free software web sites under a common TLD -- freeing up SLDs under .com and .org and .net.

(b) Leverage a potentially popular TLD to encourage (at a minimum) lip service to the FSF.

(c) Catalyze the conflict that RMS, ESR, et al perceive between free software movements.

I'll be intrigued by ICANN's eventual decision on this.

My favorite is the one from eNom featuring the following:

7. Don't roll out another .com first: If people could only buy food from just one guy, and that guy is required to sell beef (lets say he has a government concession on selling beef, so that he is the only one ably supply food, and it must be beef) then he would have a monopoly, which would be a bad thing, because people would starve if they did not buy beef from him. But then, if you want to introduce competition and other foods slowly, would it be wise to next introduce another competitor who can only sell ever-so-slightly different beef, or, one who could only sell potatoes? By letting the potato guy into the food market next, you not only provide competition to beef (people will not starve if they do not buy beef), but also introduce other benefits as well (a more nutritious and balanced diet for example). Only later, after say introducing apples, chicken, cheese, ice cream, grits, salad, sushi, lobster, gummy-bears, and beer, would it be wise to introduce more beef producers, to provide competition in the beef part of the food market. It would never be wise to introduce spinach, by the way.

This is obviously the guy I want handling my TLD.

My favorite is the one from eNom featuring the following:

7. Don't roll out another .com first: If people could only buy food from just one guy, and that guy is required to sell beef (lets say he has a government concession on selling beef, so that he is the only one ably supply food, and it must be beef) then he would have a monopoly, which would be a bad thing, because people would starve if they did not buy beef from him. But then, if you want to introduce competition and other foods slowly, would it be wise to next introduce another competitor who can only sell ever-so-slightly different beef, or, one who could only sell potatoes? By letting the potato guy into the food market next, you not only provide competition to beef (people will not starve if they do not buy beef), but also introduce other benefits as well (a more nutritious and balanced diet for example). Only later, after say introducing apples, chicken, cheese, ice cream, grits, salad, sushi, lobster, gummy-bears, and beer, would it be wise to introduce more beef producers, to provide competition in the beef part of the food market. It would never be wise to introduce spinach, by the way.

This is obviously the guy I want handling my TLD.

• 1. Contract
• 2. Proposal
• 3. Work Approach

• 1. Contract
• 2. Proposal
• 3. Work Approach

• 1. Contract
• 2. Proposal
• 3. Work Approach

This and other "expressions of interest" can be viewed on ICANN's website.

Additionally, CPT maintains a website about new tldn's.

- Vergil

This and other "expressions of interest" can be viewed on ICANN's website.

Additionally, CPT maintains a website about new tldn's.

- Vergil

For example, I recently saw in 2600 Magazine how Verizon (the result of the Bell Atlantic/GTE merger) registered something like seven hundred domains, all with "Verizon" in them... even insulting ones, like "verizonsucks.com". They had registered all these domains under the .com, .net and .org TLDs. When the 2600 guys couldn't register "verizonsucks.com", they registered "verizonREALLYsucks.com". In response, Verizon sent them a letter informing them of their violation of trademark laws. Read all about it straight from the horse's mouth. (This brings up the point: If Verizon registered "robdumas.com", could that be considered to be fraudulently using my name? I mean, after all, if I can't register a domain with THEIR name, would I/should I let them register a domain with MY name in it?)

Anyway, simply adding a new TLD will just mean that they register there, too.

The only way a .gnu TLD would be worth adding is if we, the Open Source community, somehow controlled it, so we could attempt to keep cybersquatters out, without compromising the freedom of it. Perhaps in order to GET a .gnu domain, you must PRODUCE something under the GNU Public License.

Hey, maybe one day we'll all open up Slashdot to find that Microsoft wants to register "microsoft.gnu"! Ha!

Two final point of interest, somewhat related to this story/thread:

1. The policy of InterNIC USED to be $70US for two years (or $35US per year). This was a FLAT fee. Unfortunately, thanks to the agreement reached between ICANN and NSI last year, NSI can charge whatever it likes (well, presumably within reason). So how long do you think it'll be before NSI puts up its own "domain auction" site? Before you know it, joeschmoe.com, joeschmoe.net and joeschmoe.org will be owned by Ted Turner (or someone like him; I have nothing against Mr. Turner), and would cost you thousands of dollars to get back.
2. I find it VERY unnerving that Register.com, one of the new domain registrars, is an "affiliate" of GreatDomains.com, a company who basically buys and sells domains to the highest bidder. I happen to own "novastar.net" (no, there's nothing there... I haven't gotten around to it), and registering it cost me $70US. No more, no less. But, according to GreatDomains.com, the domain "novastar.org" would cost me $250,000US! Is that a rip-off, or what?

I'm interested to hear what others have to say about the topic. Reply here, or e-mail me.
----------------------------------------
Robert Dumas

A lot of un-substantiated nay-saying, if you ask me...

Be your own judge here people, take a gander at the calender of events, who's on the board of directors or peruse the fact sheet before jumping to any conclusions.

A lot of un-substantiated nay-saying, if you ask me...

Be your own judge here people, take a gander at the calender of events, who's on the board of directors or peruse the fact sheet before jumping to any conclusions.

A lot of un-substantiated nay-saying, if you ask me...

Be your own judge here people, take a gander at the calender of events, who's on the board of directors or peruse the fact sheet before jumping to any conclusions.

what the hell is wrong with you people? What is all this crap about NSI? The following is taken from the ICANN website.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is the non-profit corporation that was formed to assume responsibility for the IP address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system management, and root server system management functions previously performed under U.S. Government contract by IANA and other entities.

As you can clearly see by even this little snippet, ICANN hass been charged with the responsibilities of administration for DNS. Other Entities (mere registrars like NSI) may facilitate the system, but ICANN is where registrars go to get their license, where the vote on new tLD's will be held, where decisions about the future of the internet are being made. You lousy people have problems with the way DNS is run now? join up and frickin vote. There are only a few thousand members, THAT LOW NUMBER OF VOTERS AMPLIFIES YOUR CONTRIBUITION. Thus, real changes can and will be affected by the people with enough sense to join up.

I thought you guys were supposed to be tuned-in and turned on around here... But ICANN gets mentioned in a mere 2 or 3 posts in a discussion about DNS? I guess you are all plain-jane wanabees after all.

As a member of the voting body for ICANN, I am shocked that you guys could be so clueless. I guess my vote will count that much more, if even the editors of /. don't have a clue...

Shame on you, slashdot community!

what the hell is wrong with you people? What is all this crap about NSI? The following is taken from the ICANN website.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is the non-profit corporation that was formed to assume responsibility for the IP address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system management, and root server system management functions previously performed under U.S. Government contract by IANA and other entities.

As you can clearly see by even this little snippet, ICANN hass been charged with the responsibilities of administration for DNS. Other Entities (mere registrars like NSI) may facilitate the system, but ICANN is where registrars go to get their license, where the vote on new tLD's will be held, where decisions about the future of the internet are being made. You lousy people have problems with the way DNS is run now? join up and frickin vote. There are only a few thousand members, THAT LOW NUMBER OF VOTERS AMPLIFIES YOUR CONTRIBUITION. Thus, real changes can and will be affected by the people with enough sense to join up.

I thought you guys were supposed to be tuned-in and turned on around here... But ICANN gets mentioned in a mere 2 or 3 posts in a discussion about DNS? I guess you are all plain-jane wanabees after all.

As a member of the voting body for ICANN, I am shocked that you guys could be so clueless. I guess my vote will count that much more, if even the editors of /. don't have a clue...

Shame on you, slashdot community!

The most recent document I've seen about the makeup of the root servers is the Root Nameservers Year 2000 Statement from last July. Since I'm just plain lazy on a Sunday morning, care to point me to the docs related to the gtld servers?

Read the requirements to become a registrar. Check out II.D.1.b.ii which is:

D. General Obligations of Registrar.
1. During the Term of this Agreement:
b. Registrar shall comply, in such operations, with all ICANN-adopted Policies insofar as they:
ii. do not unreasonably restrain competition.

Looks like NSI couldn't be a registrar if they weren't already. Of course II.D.2.i has some language that is confusing to me that might allow them to.

5. Registrar shall register SLDs to SLD holders only for fixed periods. At the conclusion of the registration period, failure by or on behalf of the SLD holder to pay a renewal fee within the time specified in a second notice or reminder shall, in the absence of extenuating circumstances, result in cancellation of the registration. In the event that ICANN adopts a policy concerning procedures for handling expiration of registrations, Registrar shall abide by that policy.

This document should exist in a version signed by the CEO of Network Solutions, so not following these rules could be considered 'breach of contract'....

Thinking is one of hardest types of work.

The best advice I can give you is to be patient and don't hold your breath.

The best advice I can give you is to be patient and don't hold your breath.

This could be one of the most important net developments in the last few years. Whether net users want to admit it or not, ICANN has sweeping powers that could make life a lot more complicated and annoying for us. It's easy for people to spout off the "Oh! It's all about big business and it's a sham..." but it DOES have a mandate and control. This is not an issue to be taken lightly. EVERY SINGLE /. MEMBER needs to sign up for the At-Large program and make their voices heard. Big business ultimately won't bite the hand the makes it profitable -- the individual users.

This is an excellent article highlighting the tremendous responsibilities that ICANN now has on its shoulders.

At the very least, ICANN will be implementing an online voting system for the ICANN At Large members, which should help speed things up. Considering some of their deadlines are as soon as September (yes, 2000), I certainly hope they don't fsck things up by dropping the ball.

Considering how dependent the world now is on the Internet, I think a crisis could occur on a global scale if ICANN doesn't live up to the world's expectations.

(Can anyone say revolution?)

--

This is an excellent article highlighting the tremendous responsibilities that ICANN now has on its shoulders.

At the very least, ICANN will be implementing an online voting system for the ICANN At Large members, which should help speed things up. Considering some of their deadlines are as soon as September (yes, 2000), I certainly hope they don't fsck things up by dropping the ball.

Considering how dependent the world now is on the Internet, I think a crisis could occur on a global scale if ICANN doesn't live up to the world's expectations.

(Can anyone say revolution?)

--

http://www.icann.org/mbx/

Where is the court filing that you speak of? I find your claim to be outrageous, and completely un-found.

In an completely one-sided advisory, which is clearly propaganda, ICANN states:

"In investigating Afternic's application for accreditation, ICANN discovered that Afternic's web site presented many offers to sell domain names based on other company's names, some with remarks reflecting the abusive nature of the offers. One company name, for example, was offered with the remark that it would be an "Excellent domain for a reseller, owner, or competitor of" the company (this example was offered at a starting bid of $125,000)....Currently, Afternic's site is offering many other domains incorporating well-known business, celebrity, and government agency names..."

Nobody likes cybersquatters, myself included, but how is this different from how Network Solutions or any other company operates in this market? You can go to register.com or Network Solutions and register anything you want, no matter what law or trademark it violates. That is between the user and the entity which feels it is being violated. The same thing is true on afternic. Just like EBAY, with almost 200,000 auctions it would be impossible to actively police everything.

Afternic did not encourage these people to purchase these names, and they fully comply with ICANN's dispute resolution process, as wells requests from trademark holders, etc.

http://www.icann.org/mbx/

US is the country code here, we just truncate it for convenience since we in the US run the show. Here you go, read all about it. You may also wish to browse rfc1480 but I'm sure they will point this out to you at the ICANN forum .

while we are on the topic, does anyone know if appending .us onto a regular US site is supposed to work? I wouldn't imagine any dns servers bother with it. And it don't work from here...


:)Fudboy

ICANN's proposed budget is available at http://www.icann.org/fi nancials/proposed-budget-04may00.htm.

Mark......

1. Running the root name servers but as I understand it Network Solutions are still actually doing that under contract - and, they're only a few, relatively small, servers - they don't cost a million a year to administer
2. Resolving disputes but ICANN have contracted that out too. And you ought to be able to make money from that.

3. So let me get this straight. ICANN need US$4.3 million per year to do what Jon Postel used to do in his spare time, for free? Nice work if you can get it. I see we're going to have some fun in Yokohama this summer...

About that letter may I recommend you consider another registar?

ICANN has long since adopted a Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, which is adhered to by all ICANN-accredited registrars. The policy is quite fair to you. There is no danger of Mattel bullying you or ICANN into giving up your domain name, simply because: ICANN (or a registrar) will not transfer/cancel a domain name unless it receives a court order or your written approval (as part of a settlement or whatever). In rare cases (such as cybersquatting or cyberpiracy), ICANN could cancel/transfer the domain name on advice from a neutral Administrative Panel, but only after the complainant shows that you have violated all three of their stringent criteria (see the link for more details). It is quite clear to me that Mattel doesn't have a case if it goes to ICANN.

It is also clear to me that Mattel doesn't have a case if it goes to court. You are clearly protected under the "non-commercial use" clause. This itself should save your goat. On top of it, the trademark dilution claim is tenuous at best. I would bet that a court will throw out the claim that "The Barbies" sounds confusingly similar to "Barbie" so much so that it dilutes their trademark. Alas, I have no money to offer on the bet, though. If you can live through a suit (if Mattel brings one against you), you will have achieved sweet victory.

On my part, I am writing to Mattel to complain.

By the way, IANAL.

Sreeram.
----------------------------------
Observation is the essence of art.

You do have to show a "use in commmerce", but the requirements for that are fairly minimal. Read the Nolo Press book on trademarks for the rules. A banner ad or an affiliate link to something probably qualifies, as long as there's potential income.

Even if your trademark application is rejected for the "principal register", which means you can keep others from using it, you can usually then file to put it on the "secondary register", which means nobody can keep you from using it. You still get to use "tm", and it's a trademark for ICANN domain dispute purposes.

http://www.icann.org/mbx/selfnomination

ASAP so that you can say what you think about the current rules for nominating At Large members. Currently, in order for a nominated member to make it onto the ballot, it appears that a nominee must get the nomination vote of 10% or more of the *registered* people in the region. Yes, that's REGISTERED people, not VOTING people.

People should visit the page and speak their mind *politely* and *intelligently* so that the comments actually get read and understood.

Additionally if you are a member you can view the self-nominating rules. Because of the difficulty they have imposed in the nomiating process it seems only a canidate endorsed by Slashdot itself could get the support to make it to the ballet.
---------------------
www.securitygeeks.com

Sponsorship [i.e. choice of registrar] of a [domain] registration may be changed at the express direction of the [domain]holder.

Sponsorship [i.e. choice of registrar] of a [domain] registration may be changed at the express direction of the [domain]holder.

NSI runs the master registry database. A version of the agreement can be found on the icann website but even further digging there will even show the exact amounts NSI gets from the Dept of Commerce and from the registrars for running the registry and which bank accounts to use for payments.

A very interesting conflict of interest could arise between the role of Network Solutions as database keeper and Network Solutions as competing registrar although the contracts try to close any holes.

I found this yesterday as I was digging for "when does an expired domain become available again" which isn't answered by NSI or ICANN at all.

NSI runs the master registry database. A version of the agreement can be found on the icann website but even further digging there will even show the exact amounts NSI gets from the Dept of Commerce and from the registrars for running the registry and which bank accounts to use for payments.

A very interesting conflict of interest could arise between the role of Network Solutions as database keeper and Network Solutions as competing registrar although the contracts try to close any holes.

I found this yesterday as I was digging for "when does an expired domain become available again" which isn't answered by NSI or ICANN at all.

"Initially, we must point out that NSI acknowledged during oral argument before this Court that the right to use a domain name is a form of intangible personal property. That position is consistent with the one NSI took in Network Solutions, Inc. v. Clue Computing, Inc. .... However ... we do not believe that it is essential to the outcome of this case to decide whether the circuit court correctly characterized a domain name as a "form of intellectual property."

In short the 2 letter domain has to appear in ISO 3166-1, which is in turn based on the UN Statistical servises lists. eu does not appear as a 'country or teritory' in either.

Have a look at their report on asigning the .pl TLD to Palestine

To quote their about page:

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is the non-profit corporation that was formed to assume responsibility for the IP address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system management, and root server system management functions previously performed under U.S. Government contract by IANA and other entities.

I'm all for people/countries agreeing (including the EU folks) but as I understand it without ICANN or maybe IANA playing along, this doesn't mean much.

Yes, I'm aware that the article says:

The domain name itself will be protected by the ICANN rules recommended by the World Organisation for Intellectual Property.

I don't mean to piss anyone off but as I understand it, the internet is still largely American due to it's roots in ARPA and that most "authorities" on the internet are American.

Citrix

To quote their about page:

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is the non-profit corporation that was formed to assume responsibility for the IP address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system management, and root server system management functions previously performed under U.S. Government contract by IANA and other entities.

I'm all for people/countries agreeing (including the EU folks) but as I understand it without ICANN or maybe IANA playing along, this doesn't mean much.

Yes, I'm aware that the article says:

The domain name itself will be protected by the ICANN rules recommended by the World Organisation for Intellectual Property.

I don't mean to piss anyone off but as I understand it, the internet is still largely American due to it's roots in ARPA and that most "authorities" on the internet are American.

Citrix