Name.Space.Info on Thu, 22 Jul 1999 22:08:27 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Toplevel Domains: Private Property or Public Resource? (fromwired news) |
>From Wired News .Web (TM)? Oscar S. Cisneros http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/20838.html 3:00 a.m. 21.Jul.99.PDT A trademark squabble over proposed new top-level Internet domains may lead to a monopoly similar to that currently enjoyed by Network Solutions. The spat centers around a handful of proposed new domains -- .web, .firm, .shop, .rec, .nom, and .info -- that are expected to relieve pressure on the hopelessly overbooked .com. Image Online Design fired the opening round in the fight this past weekend when the firm sent cease-and-desist letters to two companies vying to compete in the new domain-name market, the Council of Internet Registrars (CORE) and Name.Space. IOD has maintained a .web registry since 1996, though precious few domain-name servers recognize the extension. "We're telling them that IOD has trademark rights to .web for use with registry and registrar services," said Wesley Monroe, an attorney for Image Online Design. "We've asked them to stop using our mark in registry and registrar services and to respect our mark." While IOD is asking both CORE and Name.Space to quit registering new domains with the extension .web, it's reserving particular ire for CORE, a nonprofit group of Internet registrars from 23 countries which recently applied for a trademark over the term .web. "What CORE did last month was to apply for a trademark on .web, knowing full well that we had it all along," said IOD founder Christopher Ambler. "It's the same thing as if Burger King came along and said, 'Look, we're going to market a burger called the Big Mac.'" For its part, CORE has been busily building fences around top-level domains that it thinks should be added to the Web. "CORE's purpose in filing the service-mark applications is to demonstrate its continued interest in operating registries for the new [generic top-level domains], and to protect its rights to do so," said CORE CEO Ken Stubbs in a prepared statement. In early March CORE filed service-mark applications with the US Patent and Trademark Office for .web, .firm, .shop, .rec, .nom, and .info. CORE declined to comment on the claims of Image Online Design. Nor would the group discuss whether it would enforce exclusive rights against other registrars if awarded service marks from the USPTO. The group suggested through a spokesperson, however, that enforcing intellectual property rights in generic top-level domains was contrary to its mission of bringing nonprofit registry services to the public. Others individuals question whether one company can erect a fence around a top-level domain and call it its own. "It is settled law that the function of domain registration does not constitute a trademark inherently," said Paul Garrin, CEO and founder of domain name registrar Name.Space. "We don't believe that anybody owns top-level domains. We see them as something to be managed, not trademarked and owned." Domain-name trademark specialist Sally Abel, with the firm Fenwick & West, said that no one company can own a trademark .com, .org, or .net. "The trademark office has taken the position that the existing top-level domains are not trademarks and are generic terms," said Abel. But, she added, the increasing emphasis on the commercialization of domain-name spaces makes trademarks in top-level domains at least more "tenable." "These are certainly uncharted waters," she said, adding that asserting private ownership of domains is bad for society in the long run. But this whole trademark side battle could be moot, said Mike Roberts, president and CEO of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the entity charged by the US government with introducing competition into the domain registry business. ICANN has been busily prepping for the scrutiny of this week's congressional hearings on its oversight of the domain-name space, Roberts said. The issue of how, which, and when -- or if -- new top-level domains will be introduced won't be looked at until this fall when a working group studying the issue will present its findings and recommendations to the ICANN board, he said. "The working group is going to look at all that, but they're just beginning their work," Roberts said. "It's a question between two parties that apparently have different legal views, and it doesn't involve us right now." Of course, ICANN isn't bound to accept any of the top-level domains proposed by the various parties involved. And without that group's approval, top-level domains such as .web won't be recognized by the Internet's root servers. Still, if one company can be awarded a trademark over an entire top-level domain, the Internet may head back down the same monopoly road from which it is only now emerging. "It's not frivolous to say that you have protectable rights [in top-level domains such as .web], but a better result would be to say that you don't," Abel said. Copyright © 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. CORE http://www.corenic.org Name.Space http://namespace.org Iodesign http://www.iodesign.com # distributed via nettime-l: no commercial use without permission of author # <nettime> is a moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # un/subscribe: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and # "un/subscribe nettime-l you@address" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org/ contact: <nettime@bbs.thing.net>