View Single Post
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 29th October 2009, 05:10 AM
Asiaplay Asiaplay is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hong Kong / China
Posts: 864
iTrader: (3)
Rep Power: 504
Asiaplay is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: IDN gTLD fast track

@Gaint
I really doubt Verisign has or would now be able to get a "mark" for these in China (probably these are words which are not allowed to be trademarked alone even possibly - not sure as the China database online search crashes when I tried to search for them) - but you raise a good point about first use (who actually has precedence!).

The only consideration I can see to this is that Verisign as far as I know, have never tied these character choices to .com or .net themselves ever, nor commercially ever sold them, whereas CNNIC (and others such as HKIRC) have for a long time commercially sold domains and IDNs that use these characters as 2nd level and which fall outside those offered or controlled by Verisign (and I guess will have some legal issues if they, can't use it, since many people do own them already).
This makes me think that within China, the Chinese Govt. would probably side with CNNIC if they choose to continue to use it (or have any legal issues on dropping the use of it) and the same for any court case involving HKIRC for Hong Kong.

Basically it is a potentially a very messy case and CNNIC only needs these IDNs to resolve within China's boarders anyway (as they are 2nd level) and HKIRC only to resolve in Hong Kong - so this is very much a China issue more than an international one perhaps.

Then the next question, as we all know becomes one of, are those characters "confusing similar" and therefore, should they be allowed as a gTLD, for that reason (I would say that they could be considered confusingly similar - so there lies the root of the problem).

I personally wouldn't want to have to be the one to decide on this and do not envy anyone involved in that process.
But at the same time, it is issues like this that I think is partly the reason that ccTLD IDN.IDN was wisely separated from gTLD IDN.IDN (as ccTLD clearly use country names as their extension).

But all this aside, the point is that .com and .net need to go IDN.IDN quickly and any long winded battle would result in them losing ground, if that also stops them going IDN.IDN.
Also, it makes me wonder what Verisign thinks they should use / wants to use as IDN characters/text for their .com and .net extensions - I haven't seen anything clearly on this from them myself (even though we have all come up with ideas over the years, our thoughts at the end of the day, could be different than the approach they want to take) - anyone seen a document issued by Verisign on the characters they want to use for IDN.IDN?

@Tee1
Hehe - yeah - no one is claiming that the characters we all think, that they should be using are in conflict with anyone else ("business" seems to be theirs)... so smoother process for .biz perhaps.
I just wonder how fast they will wake up and go for gTLD IDN.IDN

If I was them, I would charge ahead for IDN.IDN, as the "business" connotation would I think, give them a strong presence in China.
Funny really... the other day when looking at my IDN list, my business partner asked me what .biz was (yes, I perhaps have too many .biz still - lol) - as he had never seen a domain use one before and had no idea what it was! (However domain investors there, of course do know about them and a lot of Chinese based in China are the owners of IDN.biz - just unfortunately they seem to be almost all parked or held only and not developed).
The downside of .biz of course, as the anchor domain / IDN of one's business, is they are not treated equal to some other gTLD or ccTLD by search engines (e.g. Google) - although I have never really understood this stance and why really (and I guess if they got wide use as IDN.IDN in Chinese, then Google might have to change this position).


Really just discussion guys, as I don't know what those with potential claims have planned behind the scenes, but at the same time, I don't see Verisign’s claim to these as being clear-cut or perhaps an easy road ahead (or CNNIC's option to just drop use, even if they ever even thought to, as legally clear-cut either).

Cheers all, Asiaplay

PS: by the way, incase anyone wondered... I don't own even one single level 2 domain name or IDN at present (as personally think level 2 is a waste of time and is not treated equal in any way by search engines or internet users, when compared to either a ccTLD or gTLD).
Reply With Quote