On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
FFS, David. I didn't say "new gTLDs". I said, rather specifically, "commercial gTLDs", IE: gTLDs *proprietary to a specific commercial enterprise*. http:///www.apple
The third message (by Eric Brunner-Williams) in the thread I referenced mentions "trademark" or "brand" TLDs: "Finally, because pancakes are calling, the very complainants of squatting and defensive registration (the 1Q million-in-revenue every applicant for an "open", now "standard" registry places in its bizplan), the Intellectual Property Stakeholder Group is also an advocate for trademark TLDs, arguing that possession of $fee and a registry platform contract (there is now a niche industry of boutique ".brand" operators-in-waiting) and a $bond establishes an absolute right to a label in the IANA root. So, rather than memorizing the digits of Pi, for some later public recitation, one could start reciting brand names, for some later public recitation, for as long as there is a single unified root." See http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2011-March/034692.html for full context. I didn't bother looking further.
And no, I had not heard *any noise* that anyone was seriously considering this up until this announcement.
Interesting data point. Regards, -drc