About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

[process2-comments] RFC-1


[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

[process2-comments] RFC-1


To: process.mail@wipo.int
Subject: [process2-comments] RFC-1
From: magnus@alum.mit.edu
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 04:45:03 +0200


 Name: Daniel Risacher I assert that the idea of domain name resolution includes a false premise: that there is a conflict between internet hostnames and other names. It has long been recognized in the software industry that there is such a thing as a "namespace"; a context in which names have meaning. Without a namespace, a name has no meaning. Take for example, the name "Xanadu". This name is a film starring Olivia Newton John. It's the name of a fictional place in a Coleridge poem. It's the name of a company. It's the name of a web renovation project. It may have several more meanings in other contexts. These names exist in different namespaces, and do not conflict. The internet domain name system is a system that assigns names to computers. It's purpose is to provide a consistent mechanism for identifying computers by unique, memorable names. By design, it provides a more-or-less unique mapping between names and numbers. By historical policy, this has been done on a first-come-first-serve basis for the most popular domains (.com, .net, .org). This policy is well understood by internet users. Trying to change the semantics of domain names retroactively introduces more tension and confusion than abiding by the first-come-first-serve process. As I understand trademarks, (and how I believe they should operate) a trademark only is protection against infringement in a particular area. So the "Ford Foundation" has no conflict with the "Ford Motor Company". By definition, internet domain names are in a well-defined area (internet hosts), and, by design, they don't conflict with each other. Therefore, there is not an underlying naming conflict. Furthermore, the internet host namespace is already heirarchical, with distict name policies for different TLDs, such as the ".int" that WIPO uses. If it is strictly necessary to have a namespace regulated by the United Nations, I suggest that a new TLD be created with that policy, rather than having the UN co-opt an existing namespace with existing policies. Daniel Risacher United States of America