Question: New TLDs mean new revenue for registrars as .coms rush to register their corresponding .biz, .firm, and .shop extensions. Do you feel this additional cost to existing sites is just? Moreover, what responsibility do you feel ICANN has to anticipate and avoid the trademark issues that flow from additional TLDs?

Nominee Replies

Emerson Tiller, J.D., Ph.D. - posted on 2000-09-29 19:21:23 I think the revenue to new registrars will be a huge windfall. ICANN should auction off the TLD's, not give them away for $50,000. Some TLDs will of course go for much less, but others could bring in the money that ICANN needs to operate. We should let the market work here. In terms of anticipating trademark, I think ICANN should let the UDRP process deal with trademark issues and not try to determine conflicting property right claims in the initial allocation. One option is to let trademark holders post anticipated claims against new TLD applicants prior to the granting of the TLD so everyone is on notice as to possible disputes that will arise later. Donald Langenberg - posted on 2000-09-24 12:25:11 Yes, I think appropriate charges are just. (Please don't ask me to define appropriate just now.) It seems to me that ICANN will inevitably find itself squarely in the middle of trademark issues, and I think it therefore must anticipate them to the extent it can. Avoiding them is probably impossible. Harris Miller - posted on 2000-09-23 18:21:33 As I mentioned elsewhere, I support the recent US court decision that stated web addresses based on unassigned domain names can not be trademarked. This is necessary to deal with the explosion of speculation and even so-called enforcement actions between various parties using unassigned domain names. This is in keeping with my desire to see ICAAN expand the TLDs on a sensible basis. ICANN does have a responsibility to perform this rollout in a manner that preserves users' expectations and Net stability. As far as TLDs, I think ICANN should seek some alternate dispute resolution process and some means of resolving the so-called famous marks issue. Lawrence Lessig - posted on 2000-09-20 09:01:35 ICANN can help facilitate understanding about the relationship between DNS and Trademark law. But ICANN should not be the Trademark police. Nor should it allow its structures to be captured by the Intellectual Property interests so that a narrow view about Trademark law becomes the rule for everyone. Obviously, if trademark law creates an incentive for holders to register in every possible domain that may well be inefficient. But that is a problem with trademark law. Let it fix itself, and the IP police leave ICANN alone.