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

Re: charter revisions


At 8:03 PM +0200 9/7/01, Michael Ströder wrote:
Stephen Kent wrote: 

 There is not a central registry for DNs
 where the CA can check to verify that the company in question is
 entitled to use the DN it proposes. Certainly this is true if the
 U.S. So, since CAs regularly make value judgements about
 appropriateness of DNs given imperfect inputs, I don't see the logo
 "verification" as something fundamentally different and harder.


Hmm, do you really want to argue based on these practices?
Now guess how serious I'll take this argument...

OK, you're on. In the U.S. try to find a definitive database that will allow a CA to verify an organization's claim to use a DN. On the other hand, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has a web site listing all names in the U.S. to which trademarks have been issued.

Your turn ...


 >But this is completely pedantic. The original issue was that a logo can
 >change appearance when it's scaled or mapped to different colors. A pink
 >circle is different from a green circle for trademark and copyright
 >purposes. But how do you distinguish them when they're displayed on a
 >black and white screen? I don't think that web page technology has any
 >magic bullets in this area. And what about blind users? With URLs, they
 >can have their screen-reader read the URL back to them. Graphics will be
 >completely inaccessible.

Good points about the limitations of a logo.

+1

I don't believe that the displaying problems can be solved.

Your belief is not a basis for making this sort of decision. Translated to a less self-centric statement, it becomes a hard statement to prove.

Steve