Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 20:47:44 -0800 From: Ted Faber <faber@ISI.EDU> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: gdk@ccomp.inode.COM, jkh@time.cdrom.COM, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mv /usr/src/games /dev/null - any objections? Message-ID: <199711050447.UAA10315@tnt.isi.edu> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 05 Nov 1997 02:00:38 GMT." <199711050200.TAA03653@usr02.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Terry Lambert wrote: >> If we've got to fight over grep, sign me up. But boggle can go. > >"And when they came for 'grep', there was no one left to oppose them..." Don't worry, I'll break all you boggle guys out of prison on my way in. :-) >If the name space is admitted to be the same as the US Trademark name >space, then we are screwed; it's only a matter of time. There are two gross simplifications in that sentence. There is no single "US Trademark Name Space" and more than one namespace relevent to computers (program names, domain names, file format names, API names...). Yes, interactions between trademarks and all those various name spaces are important, but we don't have the resources to fight them all. >> There are plenty of names/trademarks issues in domain name allocation, >> but P&G buying a couple hundred names is nothing compared to dragging >> the IANA staff in front of Congress under the Sherman Antitrust Act > >You've apparently missed that InterNIC has covered the IP address >space allocation base already, with a wholly owned subsidiary, and >the loss of the NSF contract isn't going to do anything (except >maybe deregulate the market and screw us all). I have not. As you mention, this is largely irrelevent, but anyway: First of all, IP address regulation is distinct from domain name regulation: most of those P&G names have no associated address, or map to the same address. Address space allocation has been largely decentralized and privatized for some time. Besides which, 32-bit integers have no real relation to trademarks. Issues with the domain name space are the interesting ones wrt trademark issues, and as long as one agency, InterNIC or subsidiary, is handing domains out, there will be allegations of monopoly. There have been (meritless) civil suits covered in the popular press, and Congress has held hearings on the issue as recently as September (http://www.house.gov/science/hearing.htm#Basic_Research). To my knowledge, noone's actually invoked Antitrust Legislation, but the threat's been bandied about. The NSF contract expiring is only a financial matter; the threat that Congress will decide that the FCC should hand out domain names is considerably worse than deregulation. In any case, the issue is far from dead. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ted Faber faber@isi.edu USC/ISI Computer Scientist http://www.isi.edu/~faber (310) 822-1511 x190 PGP Key: http://www.isi.edu/~faber/pubkey.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNF/6b4b4eisfQ5rpAQFFBgP/aJf1E5yQggMLkNn/6xNO3fpjSbMXbhlI YlKhm+j7n8tLZnRYqDFUyg3t31oEde8EB/DmOBN0qk+iyEn0LHt6lZsFwrnAPO6C M2VnvxjI62FZxjczPY0iE6c/86zLX1sIMpyPtFeZz8OLjXy++cciyZAeVE7NItkn WI95f3QbFt4= =VHvH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199711050447.UAA10315>