This isn't true. No one is required by law to register their trademark as
a domain name.
IANAL, but in my discussions with lawyers focused on trademark law, in
effect they are required. The perception that they are not defending their
rights effectively means they abandon them.
Defending their trademark doesn't necessarily mean registering every possible domain with the trademark in it, but it does usually mean going after other people who register a domain with the trademark in it. (Although there is always the slight problem that domain names are globally unique while very few trademarks are.)
So far, I still haven't heard a _technical_ reason against these TLD's.
The technical argument here is flattening of the name space with the associated concentration higher up the tree.
So what angle hierarchy is desirable? Obviously a completely flat space isn't good because the zones get too large, but a very deep space isn't either as it takes more time to recurse through.
/flame-suit-on/ Rather than granting new TLDs, there should be an effort to
deprecate the existing non-cc TLDs and move everyone out within 3 years. The
historical artifact of a failed experiment is no reason to continue down
that path.
So what is the rationale for organizing ourselves based on our respective countries? If I may borrow your suit for a minute, I have another suggestion: no hard limits on TLDs, but every organization only gets to have a domain name in one TLD. So the practice of registering <domain>.* would have to end.
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf