>we are now talking about registrars as commercial businesses.
>the legality of the situation is that the current scenario
>is preventing the normal mechanism of judicial precendent.
>the uk for example has set its precendent for domain name racketering,
>one case is all it takes and there is grounds for proper and valid
>protection of names under law, not under registrar paranoia.
>
>the registars make dubious calls, they are not trained in legal matters,
>they apply bush lawyers paradigm that in the end penalise the end users.

I have to agree with vic here. Not having web sites on generaic names may
advance a level playing field, but business is about competitive advantage.
Knowledge is power and to register a commercially valuable domain name
early is a competitive advantage that should be allowed.

The end result now is that there is less content than there should be,
because content depends on business models, which in turn depend on
competitive advantage and in this aspect this has been removed (or
dissallowed).

A name is only as  good as the will to make it valuable. A generic name is
not an automatic ticket to riches. At least let punters have a go at
creating value on generic names.
_____________________________________________

Larry Bloch                   
Chief Executive Officer       
NetRegistry Pty Limited       
email:  larry§netregistry.au.com
Office: +61-(0)2-9555 6299
Fax:    +61-(0)2-9555 5808

http://www.netregistry.au.com
Domain House, PO Box 2088, Sydney, NSW 1043
_____________________________________________