George Pongas, Erhan Karabardak, What new Top-Level Domains mean for IP and trademark protection

[petermeadit]

George Pongas, Erhan Karabardak, What new Top-Level Domains mean for IP and trademark protection. Guest post over at Digital Business.

www.digitalbusiness.gov.au/2015/05/15/what-new-top-level-domains-mean-for-ip-and-trademark-protection/

 

[snoopy]

99.9% of business have to worry about any of this. It is revenue for registries and registrars and that is about it.

 

[Data Glasses]

Noticed a plumber in an old ute with JcPlumbing.Net.Au (from memory) ..... it was good enough for him, on the other hand
~
BigWheel.Melbourne does work ..........select the best fit for the situation is my view

 

[Honan]

99.9% of business have to worry about any of this. It is revenue for registries and registrars and that is about it.

Typo??99.9% of business have to worry

 

[snoopy]

Typo??99.9% of business have to worry

Thank you Joe. Yes this was a typo.

 

[findtim]

once again it smells of "spin" , the disclaimer at the bottom didn't mention erhan's involvement in auda or domainshield and peter you didn't mention your involvement in the domain names policy review . what i think are 2 important facts that should be mentioned so we get the context of the article correct.
am i correct?
i know you can not control the article, but you can control the post
what really bugs me is that its on a government website, some numbnut in a government department looking to justify their job by having to add content each day gets a press release sent to them and posts it with disclaimers to save their ar$e when the TITLE is so blatantly taking the high ground of being an authority of domain issues that was written by someone that is financially benefiting from the information and propaganda being displayed.

i'm actually more peeved with the person who posted it then george, peter, erhan . its just simply unacceptable in my view for a government website to post this article.

erhan and snoopy are right, 99.99% of domain name owners need to be worried right now as ALL the spin is going towards a money grab.

tim

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

once again it smells of "spin" , the disclaimer at the bottom didn't mention erhan's involvement in auda or domainshield and peter you didn't mention your involvement in the domain names policy review . what i think are 2 important facts that should be mentioned so we get the context of the article correct.
am i correct?
i know you can not control the article, but you can control the post
what really bugs me is that its on a government website, some numbnut in a government department looking to justify their job by having to add content each day gets a press release sent to them and posts it with disclaimers to save their ar$e when the TITLE is so blatantly taking the high ground of being an authority of domain issues that was written by someone that is financially benefiting from the information and propaganda being displayed.

i'm actually more peeved with the person who posted it then george, peter, erhan . its just simply unacceptable in my view for a government website to post this article.

erhan and snoopy are right, 99.99% of domain name owners need to be worried right now as ALL the spin is going towards a money grab.

tim

Tim, before getting to carried away, you need to get a few things straight. The article does not refer to me in my auDA capacity nor is it relevant, it is quite clear that I am giving my views as an IP lawyer who acts for brand owners and domainers alike. I am a lawyer for Domain Shield and other .au and ICANN Registrars/Resellers (this is on the public record), I do not have any Directorship or interest in any Registrar. Next point is that it is irrelevant that Peter is a member of the Names Policy Panel, Peter is active in the domain space and this forum, he simply found an article of interest and shared it.

New GTLDs are very relevant to my brand owner clients, they are worried (this is the context of the article). While you may not give new GLTDs the time of day, brand owners have a lot at stake and spend lots of money protecting their brands. They may actually save themselves thousands of dollars in legal fees by registering a few relevant new GTLDs.

 

[petermeadit]

You should have come to the SEO meetup last night Tim, chris & spacey was there, and we had a great time. We learned a few things and shared some knowledge...

 

[findtim]

erhan and snoopy are right, 99.99%

this was a typo i missed, i meant honan.

in hindsight i should have PM'd for clarification rather then post, it was the combination of three people involved in official positions that got my attention.
tim

 

[Data Glasses]

I tend to think it's these guys job to tell us about the "Need"
~
I was driving along Spencer St last night and noticed a huge development .....FarEast.Net.Au

 

[snoopy]

I tend to think it's these guys job to tell us about the "Need"
~
I was driving along Spencer St last night and noticed a huge development .....FarEast.Net.Au

This and the plumber one are just "get whatever" reges. Where someone can't get their first choice and goes with whatever else. Usually it is not .net.au but sometimes lightening will strike. It doesn't help those registering .net.au's because these are people have $10 budgets.

The fareast.net.au probably says it all. A company building skyscrapers but they will not buy the .com.au even with it saying "Offers Above $1,388" on the lander, so they go with "whatever". This is how most businesses look at it, get a reg fee name and be done with it. They don't need .melbourne or a dozen variants to protect themselves from nobody. Personally I would have just gone with FarEastConsortium.com.au.