[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Framework for IDN Operations




Let me try to clarify what is proposed on this list in plain wording, to be sure there is no mistake.

1. IDNs introduce (much) more possible confusions
    than DNSascii names. The change is however in the
    number of confusion rather than in the possiblity of
    confusion. IBM.com and 1BM.com are possible with
    standard DNs. Judges will use that comparison to
    take decisions easily which will change the whole
    machanism any time.

2. IDNs introduce a way to write in plain language
    what had before to be written in ASCII only. This
    means that http://liberté.com can duplicate
    http://liberte.com - this is a subjective issue where
    a Judge may also take a decision changing the
    mechanism. All the more that different IDNs may
    correspond to the same ascii sequence in
    different languages - ccTLDs.

The proposed solutions consist in addressing these
problems with a technical mechanism (I like the word
being unclear and generic: this is a word the Judges
will like and use). This mechanism cannotbe however
described in legal contractual permanent terms as
"whole numeric DNs will not be accepted". Also these
rules are supposed to be established on a per registry
basis. This means that something may be permitted
in ".com" and prohibited in ".de"?

This means that I may protect a TM in one registry
and I may not in another one. Yet that if someone
obtains a change in a mechanism from a Judge, I
may all the sudden be able to protect it. What means
if I am not not watching a squatter my register it.

I may also means that all the sudden I may lose the
right to use an until now legitimate DN because the
mechanism has changed in some other area.

If I am not mistaken and if this may happen - even
with a very low risk factor - the first thing to do is for
for Registries to implement a wish list where all the
denied registrations would be listed and allocated
to a lottery among those having been denied to
register them. So the tables would not only keep
the existing equivalents, but the possible claims.

This would probably decrease the pressure on
Registries. Otherwise everytime they will give away
an accentuated DN to match a non accentuated one
they will fear to be sued by other registrants.

I think that the iWhos should list all the reserved
words. Today if I want 1BM.com I can find who
owns IBM.com and buy it :-) to avoid confusion.
If I really want http://liberté.com I must be able to
know who has it reserved and to buy the whole lot.

jfc