] My personal view is that given that the proposed new 2LDs (a) are designed
] to meet known end-user demand, and (b) will increase both DNA competition
] and customer choice in the commercial DNS, the ADNA Board would want to
] hear convincing arguments against the proposals

I thought I remembered something at a previous ADNA Board Meeting about
setting priorities, but unfortunately I can't find those Minutes at the
www.adna.asn.au web site, so I can't refresh my memory on what it said.

I also have difficulty reading RTF, so forgive me if some of these issues
were covered in the recent Minutes because I haven't read them yet.  If
someone can get hold of a copy in ascii text format or html format, could
they please email it to the list or put it on a www site somewhere?
 
] I do note that the International Telecommunication Union are advocating
] creation of .tm.CC domains behind every top level Country Code (CC) domain,
] as well as the creation of a top level .tm domain.

After some searching, I found a reference to this in the IAHC Final Report.
I also found a response to it from WIPO (the World Intellectual Property
Organization), which I would have thought was the most appropriate body
within the gTLD-MoU framework to address trademark issues.  It says :-

	http://www.wipo.int/eng/internet/domains/tdn/cm/cm_i_2.htm
``
                                 TDN/CM/I/2
                            DATE: March 26, 1997
	...
                         II. ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION

   Domain Name Registration Issues That Bear on Trademarks
	...
   (d) Trademark-Specific Domain Name Spaces

   The IAHC Final Report makes certain recommendations concerning the
   establishment of trademark-specific domain name spaces and/or
   sub-spaces. In particular, it refers to the establishment of a ".tm"
   sub-space in the ISO 3166 country-code top-level domain name spaces,
   and to the establishment of a ".tm.int" international
   trademark-specific domain name space.

   It is generally agreed that the existence of trademark-specific domain
   name spaces and/or sub-spaces would provide a sort of "clean-room" or
   "safe-haven" for trademark owners and an assurance to Internet users
   that the domain name they type into the computer corresponds to the
   home page of the trademark owner. However, the goal of any new
   trademark policies or rules in the context of the Internet would be to
   protect trademarks in all of the domain name spaces. Any solution
   which would leave a portion of the domain name system unprotected
   would be a partial solution, at best.

   The domain name system as a whole, which is itself in the process of
   development and transition, does not yet seem to have reached a stage
   where the establishment of a trademarkspecific domain name space can
   be decided. While many possible and attractive options for using such
   a space have been proposed and discussed, the immediate practicality
   of such a space has been questioned. In particular, an international
   .tm.int space might only be desirable if it preempted registration of
   the trademark as a domain name in the other noncountry-code spaces;
   however, the recent addition of generic toplevel domain names makes
   this unlikely in the foreseeable future.

   It is therefore believed that this issue should be re-visited at an
   appropriate time in the future.
''

In short, this seems to be diplomatically pouring cold water over the
IAHC's recommendation about tm.CC, and suggesting it be indefinitely
postponed.

(And BTW, Turkmenistan need not worry -- the proposal was tm.int,
rather than just tm.)

Does this report from WIPO count as a negative "public response" if
I quote it?
__________________________________________________________________________
David Keegel <djk&#167;cyber.com.au>  http://www.cyber.com.au/  +61 3 9642-5997
Cybersource P/L: Unix Systems Administration and TCP/IP network management