ROUNDTABLE
based, along with some keywords, but I think that brands will probably come rushing in, and that was certainly not originally envisaged.
Alexander Carter-Silk (ACS): One thing is the costs, which are going to be looked on as not so much inclusive as exclusive. However, the probability of someone outpositioning you or getting through the process to obtain a new TLD is low. I agree that the brands will pile in. One thing is that under the current system people are feeling like they have to collect a vast number of domains that they don’t need, whereas if this process gets recognition, the bad boys will stick out like a sore thumb.
Andy Churley (AC): Te new gTLDs programme is not replacing the existing TLD or ccTLD infrastructure, so organisations will have to review their strategy for registering. We still are in the dark as to how many applications ICANN will receive, but facing any organisation, whether or not it applies for a new TLD, is the fact that there are potentially hundreds of possible new TLDs under which it may be eligible to register names. So, while some registries will be closed, in that only the brand owner will be able to register names under them, some will be community and
some geographic, and that will have an effect on any organisation’s domain name registration strategy, irrespective of whether they go through the application process themselves. If you don’t have control of your domain name and it goes down, you can lose your online presence. A lot of brand owners are looking at a new gTLD in terms of the security and control benefits that a new gTLD can bring and are willing to make the investment on those grounds alone.
There are lots of reasons why people will feel more secure. Are they justified in feeling that? Is it really more secure?
AC: It will affect business risk. If you’re a bank and registered under
bank.com, anyone can come along and register
banksecurity.com. Tat’s out of your control. Whereas if you control your own closed registry TLD you are the only one who can issue and use those names, so in terms of security, it’s a reduction of risk but not an increase in technical security.
ACS: If you own the TLD, gradually over time people will get to trust it, so they will question the other domains but question the top level less.
AC: Some benefits are clearer than others, for example, one benefit to a bank is that the message to the customer is very simple: “if you interact with us online you go through your own customer webpage, only ever transact with us through that web page.” It doesn't provide any additional technical security but it™s a simple marketing message that customers can take on board and will, we hope, reduce phishing fraud.
NWS: Is that distinguishable from the current situation with just investing in
Barclays.com?
AC: Yes it is, because people will get confused by
Barclays-security.com or customerregistration-
barclays.com. Tat’s proven, but if the message is “we own this, only interact with us through .Barclays or your own customer page”, it’s a nice simple message that has been very difficult to convey so far.
DT: It’s a valid point, but I wonder how easy that communication is going to be. .bank is a good example, and taking your example of Barclays, whilst you might see .Barclays in the future there is also the question as to what to do under a possible .bank TLD. Do Barclays also register
Barclays.bank? Do they then use both options, or do they register the two and never use one,
Stacey King, senior digital and IP counsel, Richemont. Stacey King works at a luxury goods company and is based in London. She was a member of ICANN's Implementation Recommendation Team, is currently the secretary of the Intellectual Property Constituency with ICANN, and sits on the board of directors at INTA. Te views expressed are entirely her own and do not represent those of her employer or any affiliated organisation.
David Taylor, partner, Hogan Lovells International LLP. David Taylor specialises in Internet-related intellectual property and in particular the protection of brands online. He heads up a specialist domain name practice at Hogan Lovells covering new gTLD strategy, portfolio management, centralised registration, recovery and protection of domain names and clients' rights in over 200 ccTLDs and all gTLDs. He holds a PhD in Physics and is also a Domain Name Panelist for the UDRP with WIPO and with Nominet. He also sits on the ICANN GNSO council.
Nick Wenban-Smith, senior
legal
counsel, Nominet. Nick Wenban-Smith leads Nominet's Dispute Resolution Service (DRS), a mediation service for .uk domain name disputes. His remit includes sharing the DRS's best practice and experience with members of the UK and international Internet and legal industry. Prior to joining Nominet, Wenban- Smith held senior in-house legal positions at PowderJect Pharmaceuticals plc, an Oxford University biotech spinout, and Huntswood, a consulting and outsourcing business backed by 3i, where he was general counsel and company secretary. He completed his legal training in London and qualified as a solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales in 1997.
www.worldipreview.com Trademarks Brands and the Internet Volume 1, Issue 1 17
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60