Re: Branding, domain names et al.

Trevor Jordan (tjordan@vic.bigpond.net.au)
Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:57:37 +1000

At 7:03 AM +1000 20/10/98, Jan Whitaker wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, Eric Scheid wrote:
>
>|=
>|=Brands are within contexts of the product market, while domain names are
>|=within contexts of geo/socio-graphical hierarchies.
>|=
>
>hmmmm...I wonder if it's a simple as that. Why can't the name be allowed
>to be several cybergeo places just like towns are? Here's the analogy:
>Paris, Illinois is not Paris, France, but they both exist with the name
>Paris. Brighton, Victoria is not Brighton, SA is not Brighton, England,
>is not Brighton. But all happily exist because there is a higher order
>qualifier in the hierarchy.
>
>Equivalent would be booboo.com.au v booboo.com v booboo.edu.au v
>booboo.se. These are all discrete names, nothing to do with finding the
>right computer in the database of IP lookup tables. So just like people
>or fish food, why can't there be other uses of the words? Perhaps the
>answer is because the guys with the big bucks say so.

Jan

There appears to be nothing to prevent what you suggest, except perhaps a
lack of will from some quarters.

However there would be a few consequences if you tried to arrange domain
names around trade marks.

First, trade marks are national issues (despite the globalization of
trade), so what would become of the .com domain.

Second, there are around forty internationally agreed classifications of
goods and services for trade marks. These would have to included in the
domain name as either: ford.class12.com.au or ford.vehicle.com.au

Regards, Trevor Jordan