ICANN Board approves .NAME contract
Date: Tuesday July 31 2001, @06:08PM
Topic: New gTLDs

The ICANN Board approved the registry agreement for .NAME today. Under the architecture set out in the contract, the registry will control all 2LDs; individuals will register their names at the 3LD level. The registry, thus, will control smith.name, but John Smith and Bill Smith will be able to register john.smith.name and billl.smith.name respectively. Two aspects of the agreement seem especially notable.

First, registered trademark owners are entitled to ten-year "defensive registrations," excluding all registrations at the 2LD level or 3LD level, and they can enter those defensive registrations before the hoi polloi get their chance to file. So if your name is Sam Jones, say, don't count on getting a domain name; the holders of the Jones trademarks are queued up ahead of you.

Second, the registry is operating an "email forwarding service," offering the john@smith.name and bill@smith.name addresses to John and Bill Smith respectively (and itself operating all of the necessary mail servers). Amadeu Abril i Abril had objected to this offering, characterizing it as an unnecessary monopoly and describing the centralization of the email load on the registry's servers as "dangerous if you think about the security, control, censorship, data protection, spamming, data mining implications." Louis Touton responded, in part, that a registrant could always get mail at johnsmith@john.smith.name if he chose. To the extent that registrants wanted addresses in the form john@smith.name, only the registry could provide that service. It was better to allow the regiistry to provide the service, subject to close ICANN regulation, than to render such addresses wholly unavailable.

The ICANN Board voted to approve the contracts, including the "email forwarding" provision, with only Abril and Mueller-Maguhn dissenting.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
ICANN Board approves .NAME contract | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 9 comments | Search Discussion
Click this button to post a comment to this story
The options below will change how the comments display
Check box to change your default comment view
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Re: ICANN Board approves .NAME contract
by Jon_Weinberg on Wednesday August 01 2001, @02:15AM (#1549)
User #16 Info | www.threecats.net
Well, as I read Appendix L and Appendix M to the .name contract, the only grounds available to challenge a defensive registration is that the string isn't really the defensive registrant's trademark. If the company with the "Jones" mark for soap enters a defensive registration, and Sam Jones challenges it, Sam Jones loses. Unless I'm missing something . . .
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re: ICANN Board approves .NAME contract
by dtobias (dan@tobias.name) on Sunday August 05 2001, @03:29PM (#1613)
User #2967 Info | http://domains.dan.info/
More people get the names they want, even if they're named John Smith?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re: ICANN Board approves .NAME contract
by dtobias (dan@tobias.name) on Sunday August 05 2001, @03:32PM (#1614)
User #2967 Info | http://domains.dan.info/
Why do you say it was a poor choice? Namespace for individuals is one of the gaps in the old TLDs, where if you're not a commercial business or a noncommercial organization or a network provider, there really isn't a TLD that makes logical sense. You can quibble with whether ".name" is the most sensible name for this use -- all domain names are names, so suffixing personal-name domains with this doesn't make that much logical sense (the earlier proposal for .per for personal sites would be more consistent with the older TLDs), but giving namespace for personal use makes sense, and this is the one new TLD that is set up so it can't be grabbed by the trademark lobby and isn't restricted to a narrow niche market. (Yes, there are "defensive registrations" for TM owners, but they can be challenged successfully by individuals whose real name is within their perimeter.)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • This article comes from ICANNWatch

    The URL for this story is: