|
Harris Miller
- posted on 2000-10-02 07:07:43
|
|
I am not sure I understand the question. If you are asking whether I, as President of organizations which have their own .org names--itaa.org and witsa.org--should be barred from making a decision about new top level domains if I am elected to the Board, then the answer is no.
|
|
Lyman Chapin
- posted on 2000-10-02 06:38:55
|
|
Given the uncertainty about the relationship between trademarks and domain names, and the fact that a trademark owner must defend the mark in order to maintain rights to it, it's not surprising that companies are scrambling to register all possible variations on their names and trademarks in all of the unrestricted TLDs. I don't believe that working for a company that is doing exactly what one would expect it to do compromises the objectivity of an ICANN board member with respect to the introduction of new TLDs. The fear is presumably that the board member would oppose expansion of the TLD space to protect her company's investment in defending its marks as domain names, but it's not at all clear at this point whether corporate intellectual property interests would be harder or easier to defend in a greatly expanded TLD space.
|
|
Donald Langenberg
- posted on 2000-10-01 19:43:04
|
|
This is not a yes or no question. Most members of most boards have personal and institutional interests. If I were to become an ICANN board member, for example, I would inevitably bring to the Board an array of interests developed in half a century of work in international research and education enterprises. All boards have conflict of interest policies intended to prevent inappropriate behavior of their members related to their interests. I'm sure the ICANN board is no exception. So the question is, is its policy appropriate and properly applied. I don't yet know the answer to that.
|
|
Barbara Simons
- posted on 2000-10-01 14:07:42
|
I am guessing that underlying this question is the concern that a company that owns the .com, .net, and .org versions of its domain name would be opposed to a significant expansion in the number of new TLDs. I share that concern, and I also realize that there are people working for such companies who are independent thinkers. So I don't know what the right answer is. If I am elected to the Board and if issues arise where I believe there may be a conflict of interest on the part of another Board member, I shall ask that Board member to recuse himself or herself on that issue.
I have no obligations to any organization, so I don't anticipate that I shall have to deal with my own conflicts of interest.
|
|
Karl Auerbach
- posted on 2000-09-30 12:25:01
|
|
Given the current laws that require trade/service mark owners to actively protect their marks and the ambiguity whether TLD suffixes provide distinct name spaces for purposes of mark protection, one can readily understand why a trademark holder registers his/her mark in all TLDs.
To my mind a person should not be disqualified, or even considered less than openminded, simply because that person, or the company he/she works for, recognizes the current state of the law and take steps that many consider prudent to preserve his/her legitimate rights.
|
|
Emerson Tiller, J.D., Ph.D.
- posted on 2000-09-30 12:04:01
|
|
Yes, this is probably OK, as long as the company's acronym is not being considered as a TLD. If the acronym is being considered as a TLD, the director should recuse herself/himself from any direct decisionmaking responsibilities with respect to that TLD.
|
|
Lawrence Lessig
- posted on 2000-09-30 11:38:10
|
|
Yes, so long as there is no rule against
such behavior.
|
