<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Threatdown: GAC Wants Second Level Place Names Protected</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domainnamewire.com/2009/03/30/threatdown-gac-wants-second-level-place-names-protected/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/03/30/threatdown-gac-wants-second-level-place-names-protected/</link>
	<description>Domain Name Industry News and Views</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 20:25:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philip Corwin</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/03/30/threatdown-gac-wants-second-level-place-names-protected/comment-page-1/#comment-373349</link>
		<dc:creator>Philip Corwin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 23:28:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=5471#comment-373349</guid>
		<description>The ICA filed comments opposing the GAC position on Geo names in new gTLDs back in December 2008 and I spoke out on this as well at the ICANN Public Forum during the Mexico City meeting in early March.
ICA is the only organization informing domainers of the trademark and geo name threats arising in the new gTLD process and the only organization defending your interests in the ICANN process.These issues remain very much in play and will be revisited by the ICANN Board at the Sydney meeting in June.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The ICA filed comments opposing the GAC position on Geo names in new gTLDs back in December 2008 and I spoke out on this as well at the ICANN Public Forum during the Mexico City meeting in early March.<br />
ICA is the only organization informing domainers of the trademark and geo name threats arising in the new gTLD process and the only organization defending your interests in the ICANN process.These issues remain very much in play and will be revisited by the ICANN Board at the Sydney meeting in June.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jp</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/03/30/threatdown-gac-wants-second-level-place-names-protected/comment-page-1/#comment-372877</link>
		<dc:creator>jp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:28:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=5471#comment-372877</guid>
		<description>I have always thought geo domains to be a bit riskier than just a generic like Toys.com. These geos like SanDiego.com are incorporated cities in the US, similar to a corporation. We can agree to disagree, but I&#039;m sure we can all agree that there are some paralells between cities and corporations. And when all the Cities in the US decide they want their domains back, what are you going to do about it? They are a pretty big component of our government. 

So the big question on my mind is if GAC wants to protect stuff like SanDiego.tld, how about SanDiegoComputerRepair.tld? I own SanDiegoComputerRepair.com.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have always thought geo domains to be a bit riskier than just a generic like Toys.com. These geos like SanDiego.com are incorporated cities in the US, similar to a corporation. We can agree to disagree, but I&#8217;m sure we can all agree that there are some paralells between cities and corporations. And when all the Cities in the US decide they want their domains back, what are you going to do about it? They are a pretty big component of our government. </p>
<p>So the big question on my mind is if GAC wants to protect stuff like SanDiego.tld, how about SanDiegoComputerRepair.tld? I own SanDiegoComputerRepair.com.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jp</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/03/30/threatdown-gac-wants-second-level-place-names-protected/comment-page-1/#comment-372869</link>
		<dc:creator>jp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:11:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=5471#comment-372869</guid>
		<description>Threatdown is a fantastic idea!

I have always said that Geo&#039;s are a little sketchy. These places like &quot;SanDiego.com&quot; are incorporated municipalities into the US. A city is essentially like a business, so I see a paralell to a typical TM issue. I do like geo&#039;s and I think they are way safer than a TM domain (obviously) however less secure than something like Toys.com. The question I ask about protecting &quot;Place Names&quot; is if you can&#039;t register &quot;SanDiego.tld&quot; could you register &quot;SanDiegoComputerRepair.tld&quot;? I own SanDiegoComputerRepair.com.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Threatdown is a fantastic idea!</p>
<p>I have always said that Geo&#8217;s are a little sketchy. These places like &#8220;SanDiego.com&#8221; are incorporated municipalities into the US. A city is essentially like a business, so I see a paralell to a typical TM issue. I do like geo&#8217;s and I think they are way safer than a TM domain (obviously) however less secure than something like Toys.com. The question I ask about protecting &#8220;Place Names&#8221; is if you can&#8217;t register &#8220;SanDiego.tld&#8221; could you register &#8220;SanDiegoComputerRepair.tld&#8221;? I own SanDiegoComputerRepair.com.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Domain Name Wire Â» News Â» Threatdown: GAC Wants Second Level Place &#8230;</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/03/30/threatdown-gac-wants-second-level-place-names-protected/comment-page-1/#comment-372673</link>
		<dc:creator>Domain Name Wire Â» News Â» Threatdown: GAC Wants Second Level Place &#8230;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 19:19:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=5471#comment-372673</guid>
		<description>[...] Continued here: Domain Name Wire Â» News Â» Threatdown: GAC Wants Second Level Place &#8230; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p>[...] Continued here: Domain Name Wire Â» News Â» Threatdown: GAC Wants Second Level Place &#8230; [...]</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Latest Domainer News</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/03/30/threatdown-gac-wants-second-level-place-names-protected/comment-page-1/#comment-529107</link>
		<dc:creator>Latest Domainer News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:44:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=5471#comment-529107</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;Threatdown: GAC Wants Second Level Place Names Protected - http://tinyurl.com/dfrvbt&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">Threatdown: GAC Wants Second Level Place Names Protected &#8211; <a href="http://tinyurl.com/dfrvbt" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/dfrvbt</a></span></span></span></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

