Re: ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs

[David Conrad <drc () virtualized org>]

On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> FFS, David.  I didn't say "new gTLDs".  I said, rather specifically, 
> "commercial gTLDs", IE: gTLDs *proprietary to a specific commercial 
> enterprise*.  http:///www.apple

The third message (by Eric Brunner-Williams) in the thread I referenced mentions "trademark" or "brand" TLDs:

"Finally, because pancakes are calling, the very complainants of 
squatting and defensive registration (the 1Q million-in-revenue every 
applicant for an "open", now "standard" registry places in its 
bizplan), the Intellectual Property Stakeholder Group is also an 
advocate for trademark TLDs, arguing that possession of $fee and a 
registry platform contract (there is now a niche industry of boutique 
".brand" operators-in-waiting) and a $bond establishes an absolute 
right to a label in the IANA root.

So, rather than memorizing the digits of Pi, for some later public 
recitation, one could start reciting brand names, for some later 
public recitation, for as long as there is a single unified root."

See http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2011-March/034692.html for full context.

I didn't bother looking further.

> And no, I had not heard *any noise* that anyone was seriously considering
> this up until this announcement.

Interesting data point.

Regards,
-drc