Thread: New gTLDs available / how to protect the PostgreSQL brand
Hi everyone, The ICANN has launched a few month ago a new program to release 100 generic top-level domains (gTLDs), such as ".kitchen", ".sexy", ".tatoo", etc. Personally I think this expansion has a flawed justification and that it will only do harm to brand owners and create overall confusion. Anyway whether we like it or not, these new gTLDs are out there in the wild and I think the PostgreSQL community needs to organize itself to protect its brand. For example, the domain "postgresql.guru" is already reserved and we don't have any control on it. Looking at this situation, DALIBO decided to take action quickly and during the last few days we acquired the following domains : postgresql.academy postgresql.training postgresql.support postgresql.solutions postgresql.company All these domains are now redirected to postgresql.org. DALIBO will never use them to promote its own activities. We are willing to transfer these domains ASAP to a community-driven non-profit legal entity who would have a mission of protecting the strategic PostgreSQL gTLDs against cyber-squatting and other bad behaviors. This entity could be SPI, PostgreSQL Europe or PGCAC (if it's still alive) We do not consider that every new gTLDs should be protected. Things like postgresql.plumbing, postgresql.restaurant or postgresql.aero won't create any confusion for the PostgreSQL user base. However domains like the ones we acquired today are critical. We hope that every one will agree that if a company runs a www.postgresql.support website, some users may think that it is an official initiative from the PostgreSQL community to provide support. Now some may ask : why did DALIBO acquired these domains before launching this thread ? Why not discuss the matter here first and then register the domains we want to protect. The answer is that some of the new gTLDS are already taken (postgresql.guru) and we have the feeling that this thread will be long, leaving the opportunity to anyone to grab the domains before we even start to find an agreement. By acquiring these domains, we also want to highlight the fact that our community has an history of badly handling its own domains. We're not pointing the finger at anyone in particular. Protecting a brand is a difficult thing for a decentralized community like us. However we think the PostgreSQL community can do better. We believe there are lots of PostgreSQL companies that are willing to pay an independent entity to hold and protect the strategic PostgreSQL top-level domains. Regards, -- Damien CLOCHARD Directeur des Opérations / COO Cel : +33 (0)6 74 15 56 78 http://dalibo.com - http://dalibo.org
Re: New gTLDs available / how to protect the PostgreSQL brand
From
"Nicholson, Brad (Toronto, ON, CA)"
Date:
> -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-advocacy-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-advocacy- > owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of damien clochard > Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 8:46 AM > To: PostgreSQL Advocacy > Subject: [pgsql-advocacy] New gTLDs available / how to protect the > PostgreSQL brand > > Hi everyone, > > The ICANN has launched a few month ago a new program to release 100 > generic top-level domains (gTLDs), such as ".kitchen", ".sexy", ".tatoo", etc. > Personally I think this expansion has a flawed justification and that it will only > do harm to brand owners and create overall confusion. Anyway whether we > like it or not, these new gTLDs are out there in the wild and I think the > PostgreSQL community needs to organize itself to protect its brand. It might be worth reaching out to Afilias (who I believe operates these) to see if there is anything that can be done here. They are big Postgres users and supporters. Brad.
Hi On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:45 AM, damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > The ICANN has launched a few month ago a new program to release 100 > generic top-level domains (gTLDs), such as ".kitchen", ".sexy", > ".tatoo", etc. Personally I think this expansion has a flawed > justification and that it will only do harm to brand owners and create > overall confusion. Anyway whether we like it or not, these new gTLDs are > out there in the wild and I think the PostgreSQL community needs to > organize itself to protect its brand. > > For example, the domain "postgresql.guru" is already reserved and we > don't have any control on it. > > Looking at this situation, DALIBO decided to take action quickly and > during the last few days we acquired the following domains : > > postgresql.academy > postgresql.training > postgresql.support > postgresql.solutions > postgresql.company > > All these domains are now redirected to postgresql.org. DALIBO will > never use them to promote its own activities. We are willing to transfer > these domains ASAP to a community-driven non-profit legal entity who > would have a mission of protecting the strategic PostgreSQL gTLDs > against cyber-squatting and other bad behaviors. This entity could be > SPI, PostgreSQL Europe or PGCAC (if it's still alive) PGCAC is very much still alive, and is the entity that holds the trademarks and domains for postgresql.org. Please contact me offlist if you would like to go ahead with the transfer. Thanks. > We do not consider that every new gTLDs should be protected. Things like > postgresql.plumbing, postgresql.restaurant or postgresql.aero won't > create any confusion for the PostgreSQL user base. However domains like > the ones we acquired today are critical. We hope that every one will > agree that if a company runs a www.postgresql.support website, some > users may think that it is an official initiative from the PostgreSQL > community to provide support. > > Now some may ask : why did DALIBO acquired these domains before > launching this thread ? Why not discuss the matter here first and then > register the domains we want to protect. The answer is that some of the > new gTLDS are already taken (postgresql.guru) and we have the feeling > that this thread will be long, leaving the opportunity to anyone to grab > the domains before we even start to find an agreement. > > By acquiring these domains, we also want to highlight the fact that our > community has an history of badly handling its own domains. We're not > pointing the finger at anyone in particular. Protecting a brand is a > difficult thing for a decentralized community like us. However we think > the PostgreSQL community can do better. We believe there are lots of > PostgreSQL companies that are willing to pay an independent entity to > hold and protect the strategic PostgreSQL top-level domains. > > Regards, > > -- > Damien CLOCHARD > Directeur des Opérations / COO > Cel : +33 (0)6 74 15 56 78 > http://dalibo.com - http://dalibo.org > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>> >> postgresql.academy >> postgresql.training >> postgresql.support >> postgresql.solutions >> postgresql.company >> >> All these domains are now redirected to postgresql.org. DALIBO will >> never use them to promote its own activities. We are willing to transfer >> these domains ASAP to a community-driven non-profit legal entity who >> would have a mission of protecting the strategic PostgreSQL gTLDs >> against cyber-squatting and other bad behaviors. This entity could be >> SPI, PostgreSQL Europe or PGCAC (if it's still alive) > > PGCAC is very much still alive, and is the entity that holds the > trademarks and domains for postgresql.org. > Hi Dave, I was not aware of that and I think it's good news ! Thanks for your efforts and to all the people involved in PGCAC. However I'm confused because the whois request on the .org domain does not mention the association at all. http://www.whois.com/whois/postgresql.org Am I missing something ? Meanwhile is it possible to have some more information about the PGCAC association ? Who's involved in it ? How people can help ? etc. Maybe a page on the PostgreSQL wiki ? -- damien clochard PS : I'll contact you offlist today for the domain transfer
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 9:52 AM, damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote:
Hi Dave,
>>
>> postgresql.academy
>> postgresql.training
>> postgresql.support
>> postgresql.solutions
>> postgresql.company
>>
>> All these domains are now redirected to postgresql.org. DALIBO will
>> never use them to promote its own activities. We are willing to transfer
>> these domains ASAP to a community-driven non-profit legal entity who
>> would have a mission of protecting the strategic PostgreSQL gTLDs
>> against cyber-squatting and other bad behaviors. This entity could be
>> SPI, PostgreSQL Europe or PGCAC (if it's still alive)
>
> PGCAC is very much still alive, and is the entity that holds the
> trademarks and domains for postgresql.org.
>
I was not aware of that and I think it's good news ! Thanks for your
efforts and to all the people involved in PGCAC. However I'm confused
because the whois request on the .org domain does not mention the
association at all.
http://www.whois.com/whois/postgresql.org
Yes, that needs to be fixed. Christopher Browne, the listed owner of the domain, is the treasurer of the PGCAC.
Am I missing something ?
Meanwhile is it possible to have some more information about the PGCAC
association ? Who's involved in it ? How people can help ? etc. Maybe a
page on the PostgreSQL wiki ?
They have a website at http://www.postgres.ca/.
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
> > Meanwhile is it possible to have some more information about the PGCAC > association ? Who's involved in it ? How people can help ? etc. Maybe a > page on the PostgreSQL wiki ? > > > They have a website at http://www.postgres.ca/. > That's the information I was looking for thanks ! However the big question remains : how do we protect the other domains ? We've acquired a bunch of strategic new gTLDs but the ICANN will continue to release new ones almost every week. Full released list here : http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings My understanding is that they will release approx 1500 gTLDs over the next 2 years. Again we don't need to acquire every single new gTLDs but some of the release should be protected. Specifically I'm thinking of .community, . expert, .consulting which should be available publicly soon. How do you go on with this ? Does PGCAC has the ability to make a list a .gTLD that should be acquired ? Show we discuss the list here first ? As PGCAC holds the PostgreSQL trademarks, it has access to the "defensive phase" of the release process, also called "Sunrise". This means PGCAC can be warned by email when someone wants to buy a new postgresql.whatever domain and then has a few days to acquire it in priority. Of course DALIBO can continue to monitor the new release of strategic PostgreSQL gTLDs but we will be far less efficient than the trademark holder itself. If that's helpful, I can try to reach some folks at GANDI, the main French domain name registration service. They're very PostgreSQL-friendly (they're hosting the postgresql.fr platform) and may provide some help with the sunrise mode. See : http://www.gandibar.net/post/2013/10/29/The-launch-of-the-new-gTLDs
Hi Damien, On Apr 10, 2014, at 5:49 AM, damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote: > However the big question remains : how do we protect the other domains ? > We've acquired a bunch of strategic new gTLDs but the ICANN will > continue to release new ones almost every week. Full released list here : > > http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings > > My understanding is that they will release approx 1500 gTLDs over the > next 2 years. Again we don't need to acquire every single new gTLDs but > some of the release should be protected. Specifically I'm thinking of > .community, . expert, .consulting which should be available publicly soon. I agree with most of this - it is important to protect the PostgreSQL digital brand. However, I would make a notable exceptionfor some of the commercially oriented ones (e.g. .expert .consulting) as many of the companies that provide directsupport for the PostgreSQL community would be appropriately branding themselves with those names. With that said, I would not just want *any* company to purchase those names, but the PostgreSQL-focused companies that aretrusted by the company. For instance, if Dalibo bought "postgresql.consulting" and decided to use it for itself, I personallywould not have a problem for that given all the time and money Dalibo has given to the community. However, I do have a potential compromise where I can see both sides benefitting: * Commercially focused gTLDs are initial bought by the community * Community holds a charitable auction among verified companies for specific domain names * Proceeds from auction are donated to one of the PostgreSQL nonprofits That way, we (a) protect the brand, (b) ensure that there is an appropriate representative of the PostgreSQL brand and (c)raise money that can be used for advocacy, if not development efforts. Best, Jonathan
Jonathan,
* Jonathan S. Katz (jonathan.katz@excoventures.com) wrote:
> I agree with most of this - it is important to protect the PostgreSQL digital brand. However, I would make a notable
exceptionfor some of the commercially oriented ones (e.g. .expert .consulting) as many of the companies that provide
directsupport for the PostgreSQL community would be appropriately branding themselves with those names.
I'm not really a fan of this. We do own certain trademarks and if we
don't at least pretend to enforce them appropriately they could end up
being lost.
> With that said, I would not just want *any* company to purchase those names, but the PostgreSQL-focused companies
thatare trusted by the company. For instance, if Dalibo bought "postgresql.consulting" and decided to use it for
itself,I personally would not have a problem for that given all the time and money Dalibo has given to the community.
This is the other side of that coin- it'd be quite bad for us if the
"wrong" company purchased the domain.
> However, I do have a potential compromise where I can see both sides benefitting:
>
> * Commercially focused gTLDs are initial bought by the community
> * Community holds a charitable auction among verified companies for specific domain names
> * Proceeds from auction are donated to one of the PostgreSQL nonprofits
>
> That way, we (a) protect the brand, (b) ensure that there is an appropriate representative of the PostgreSQL brand
and(c) raise money that can be used for advocacy, if not development efforts.
I'd go at this a slightly different way- we'd have the domains bought by
the community, hosted on PG infrastructure, but then redirected or
published as parts of our existing website where we already have
policies and procedures for how commercial companies can be listed,
de-listed, and generally represented.
Thanks,
Stephen
Attachment
Hi Stephen, > * Jonathan S. Katz (jonathan.katz@excoventures.com) wrote: >> I agree with most of this - it is important to protect the PostgreSQL digital brand. However, I would make a notableexception for some of the commercially oriented ones (e.g. .expert .consulting) as many of the companies that providedirect support for the PostgreSQL community would be appropriately branding themselves with those names. > > I'm not really a fan of this. We do own certain trademarks and if we > don't at least pretend to enforce them appropriately they could end up > being lost. That's fair, but we should see what the trademarks explicitly entitle us to in the context of the gTLDs. If we're not explicitlyentitled to "postgresql.expert" then it really becomes a race for the community to buy it up because we may notbe able to enforce control of the domain. >> With that said, I would not just want *any* company to purchase those names, but the PostgreSQL-focused companies thatare trusted by the company. For instance, if Dalibo bought "postgresql.consulting" and decided to use it for itself,I personally would not have a problem for that given all the time and money Dalibo has given to the community. > > This is the other side of that coin- it'd be quite bad for us if the > "wrong" company purchased the domain. Well, yes, I was going through the steps of the story here :P >> However, I do have a potential compromise where I can see both sides benefitting: >> >> * Commercially focused gTLDs are initial bought by the community >> * Community holds a charitable auction among verified companies for specific domain names >> * Proceeds from auction are donated to one of the PostgreSQL nonprofits >> >> That way, we (a) protect the brand, (b) ensure that there is an appropriate representative of the PostgreSQL brand and(c) raise money that can be used for advocacy, if not development efforts. > > I'd go at this a slightly different way- we'd have the domains bought by > the community, hosted on PG infrastructure, but then redirected or > published as parts of our existing website where we already have > policies and procedures for how commercial companies can be listed, > de-listed, and generally represented. I do like this idea. However, I was trying to see if it would be possible to use this as an opportunity to raise some revenuefor the nonprofits supporting the community. With that said, if there is a general consensus to take the domainsand have them redirect to appropriate parts of the PostgreSQL website, that is more than fair and benefits the community. Jonathan
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 3:52 AM, damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote: > >>> >>> postgresql.academy >>> postgresql.training >>> postgresql.support >>> postgresql.solutions >>> postgresql.company >>> >>> All these domains are now redirected to postgresql.org. DALIBO will >>> never use them to promote its own activities. We are willing to transfer >>> these domains ASAP to a community-driven non-profit legal entity who >>> would have a mission of protecting the strategic PostgreSQL gTLDs >>> against cyber-squatting and other bad behaviors. This entity could be >>> SPI, PostgreSQL Europe or PGCAC (if it's still alive) >> >> PGCAC is very much still alive, and is the entity that holds the >> trademarks and domains for postgresql.org. >> > > Hi Dave, > > I was not aware of that and I think it's good news ! Thanks for your > efforts and to all the people involved in PGCAC. However I'm confused > because the whois request on the .org domain does not mention the > association at all. > > http://www.whois.com/whois/postgresql.org > > Am I missing something ? It lists our Chair (tech contact) and Treasurer (registrant and admin contact). We do need to get the organisation name added. I'll look at that. > PS : I'll contact you offlist today for the domain transfer > > Thanks. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
I'm not really a fan of this. We do own certain trademarks and if we
* Jonathan S. Katz (jonathan.katz@excoventures.com) wrote:
> I agree with most of this - it is important to protect the PostgreSQL digital brand. However, I would make a notable exception for some of the commercially oriented ones (e.g. .expert .consulting) as many of the companies that provide direct support for the PostgreSQL community would be appropriately branding themselves with those names.
don't at least pretend to enforce them appropriately they could end up
being lost.This is the other side of that coin- it'd be quite bad for us if the
> With that said, I would not just want *any* company to purchase those names, but the PostgreSQL-focused companies that are trusted by the company. For instance, if Dalibo bought "postgresql.consulting" and decided to use it for itself, I personally would not have a problem for that given all the time and money Dalibo has given to the community.
"wrong" company purchased the domain.
Not even just the "wrong" company. If Dalibo bought the domain, I'm sure companies like 2ndQuadrant or EDB would be upset - and rightfully so. (Company names just picked out of the blue, substitute for "any postgres company"). Especially if the community somehow endorsed it.
And even if we do accept our "trusted" company, how are you going to come up with a definition for that that everybody agrees on?
> However, I do have a potential compromise where I can see both sides benefitting:
>
> * Commercially focused gTLDs are initial bought by the community
> * Community holds a charitable auction among verified companies for specific domain names
> * Proceeds from auction are donated to one of the PostgreSQL nonprofits
>
> That way, we (a) protect the brand, (b) ensure that there is an appropriate representative of the PostgreSQL brand and (c) raise money that can be used for advocacy, if not development efforts.
I think that's a really bad idea. The whole "let's bid for domainnames and make sure we hoard them all" is not a practice we should *encourage* IMO. And any small or medium postgres company would stand no chance in such an auction anyway, should one of the bigger ones be even a little bit interested in it.
If we were to go with such an auction, I for one would put my own money down to any group of people who would donate the domain back to the community :P Sort of under the "let's group our bids" thing that tends to happen when we do our conference auctions. If we are that desperate for money.
I'd go at this a slightly different way- we'd have the domains bought by
the community, hosted on PG infrastructure, but then redirected or
published as parts of our existing website where we already have
policies and procedures for how commercial companies can be listed,
de-listed, and generally represented.
This seems like a *much* better solution. We do have our "professional services" section which is where it could go - and then that section should be updated to actually be better than it is now :)
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 3:52 AM, damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote: >> >>>> >>>> postgresql.academy >>>> postgresql.training >>>> postgresql.support >>>> postgresql.solutions >>>> postgresql.company >>>> >>>> All these domains are now redirected to postgresql.org. DALIBO will >>>> never use them to promote its own activities. We are willing to transfer >>>> these domains ASAP to a community-driven non-profit legal entity who >>>> would have a mission of protecting the strategic PostgreSQL gTLDs >>>> against cyber-squatting and other bad behaviors. This entity could be >>>> SPI, PostgreSQL Europe or PGCAC (if it's still alive) >>> >>> PGCAC is very much still alive, and is the entity that holds the >>> trademarks and domains for postgresql.org. >>> >> >> Hi Dave, >> >> I was not aware of that and I think it's good news ! Thanks for your >> efforts and to all the people involved in PGCAC. However I'm confused >> because the whois request on the .org domain does not mention the >> association at all. >> >> http://www.whois.com/whois/postgresql.org >> >> Am I missing something ? > > It lists our Chair (tech contact) and Treasurer (registrant and admin contact). > > We do need to get the organisation name added. I'll look at that. Turns out that ain't so easy. I've asked Chris to raise it with the registrar. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Hi Magnus,
Not even just the "wrong" company. If Dalibo bought the domain, I'm sure companies like 2ndQuadrant or EDB would be upset - and rightfully so. (Company names just picked out of the blue, substitute for "any postgres company"). Especially if the community somehow endorsed it.And even if we do accept our "trusted" company, how are you going to come up with a definition for that that everybody agrees on?
Well, we could use the official "Sponsors" list, which now has well-defined criteria, but...
> However, I do have a potential compromise where I can see both sides benefitting:
>
> * Commercially focused gTLDs are initial bought by the community
> * Community holds a charitable auction among verified companies for specific domain names
> * Proceeds from auction are donated to one of the PostgreSQL nonprofits
>
> That way, we (a) protect the brand, (b) ensure that there is an appropriate representative of the PostgreSQL brand and (c) raise money that can be used for advocacy, if not development efforts.I think that's a really bad idea. The whole "let's bid for domainnames and make sure we hoard them all" is not a practice we should *encourage* IMO. And any small or medium postgres company would stand no chance in such an auction anyway, should one of the bigger ones be even a little bit interested in it.
...that's a fair point and...
If we were to go with such an auction, I for one would put my own money down to any group of people who would donate the domain back to the community :P Sort of under the "let's group our bids" thing that tends to happen when we do our conference auctions. If we are that desperate for money.
...and as we are not "desperate" for money.
Anyway, it was more a proposition to help generate some extra revenue for the nonprofits, by no means do we have to do it, particularly if it's going to send the wrong message :-)
I'd go at this a slightly different way- we'd have the domains bought by
the community, hosted on PG infrastructure, but then redirected or
published as parts of our existing website where we already have
policies and procedures for how commercial companies can be listed,
de-listed, and generally represented.This seems like a *much* better solution. We do have our "professional services" section which is where it could go - and then that section should be updated to actually be better than it is now :)
I can throw a +1 towards that.
In terms of *updating* the section, the new services coming in get thoroughly vetted *ahem* but we need to go through all of them and see which ones are still active / relevant. And I'm pretty sure I know who the "we" is for this task.
Jonathan
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jonathan.katz@excoventures.com> wrote:
On Apr 10, 2014, at 1:41 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:I'd go at this a slightly different way- we'd have the domains bought by
the community, hosted on PG infrastructure, but then redirected or
published as parts of our existing website where we already have
policies and procedures for how commercial companies can be listed,
de-listed, and generally represented.This seems like a *much* better solution. We do have our "professional services" section which is where it could go - and then that section should be updated to actually be better than it is now :)I can throw a +1 towards that.In terms of *updating* the section, the new services coming in get thoroughly vetted *ahem* but we need to go through all of them and see which ones are still active / relevant. And I'm pretty sure I know who the "we" is for this task.
We need to do tat, but we also need to do something about the whole structure and how the code works around thta one. I've had some ideas, but never gotten to the point of actually figuring out a complete suggestion..
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Great. I appreciate Dalibo's effort. Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp > Hi everyone, > > The ICANN has launched a few month ago a new program to release 100 > generic top-level domains (gTLDs), such as ".kitchen", ".sexy", > ".tatoo", etc. Personally I think this expansion has a flawed > justification and that it will only do harm to brand owners and create > overall confusion. Anyway whether we like it or not, these new gTLDs are > out there in the wild and I think the PostgreSQL community needs to > organize itself to protect its brand. > > For example, the domain "postgresql.guru" is already reserved and we > don't have any control on it. > > Looking at this situation, DALIBO decided to take action quickly and > during the last few days we acquired the following domains : > > postgresql.academy > postgresql.training > postgresql.support > postgresql.solutions > postgresql.company > > All these domains are now redirected to postgresql.org. DALIBO will > never use them to promote its own activities. We are willing to transfer > these domains ASAP to a community-driven non-profit legal entity who > would have a mission of protecting the strategic PostgreSQL gTLDs > against cyber-squatting and other bad behaviors. This entity could be > SPI, PostgreSQL Europe or PGCAC (if it's still alive) > > We do not consider that every new gTLDs should be protected. Things like > postgresql.plumbing, postgresql.restaurant or postgresql.aero won't > create any confusion for the PostgreSQL user base. However domains like > the ones we acquired today are critical. We hope that every one will > agree that if a company runs a www.postgresql.support website, some > users may think that it is an official initiative from the PostgreSQL > community to provide support. > > Now some may ask : why did DALIBO acquired these domains before > launching this thread ? Why not discuss the matter here first and then > register the domains we want to protect. The answer is that some of the > new gTLDS are already taken (postgresql.guru) and we have the feeling > that this thread will be long, leaving the opportunity to anyone to grab > the domains before we even start to find an agreement. > > By acquiring these domains, we also want to highlight the fact that our > community has an history of badly handling its own domains. We're not > pointing the finger at anyone in particular. Protecting a brand is a > difficult thing for a decentralized community like us. However we think > the PostgreSQL community can do better. We believe there are lots of > PostgreSQL companies that are willing to pay an independent entity to > hold and protect the strategic PostgreSQL top-level domains. > > Regards, > > -- > Damien CLOCHARD > Directeur des Opérations / COO > Cel : +33 (0)6 74 15 56 78 > http://dalibo.com - http://dalibo.org > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
On 04/10/2014 10:58 AM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: >> I'm not really a fan of this. We do own certain trademarks and if we >> > don't at least pretend to enforce them appropriately they could end up >> > being lost. > That's fair, but we should see what the trademarks explicitly entitle us to in the context of the gTLDs. If we're notexplicitly entitled to "postgresql.expert" then it really becomes a race for the community to buy it up because we maynot be able to enforce control of the domain. > There's a Trademark Clearinghouse thing I'm registering for; it should block further attempts to grab domains etc. Depending on who grabbed some of the new domains, we may have to engage in enforcement actions; however, we're fairly well staffed with people in this project who know the domain dispute process quite well. Of course, if folks acquired domains in good faith, we'll have to compensate themfor their actual expenses. And it may require explicit authorization of already supported domain holders (postgresql.us, postgresql.eu, etc.) I don't think it's practical for the PostgreSQL project to engage in the leasing of domains to commercial entities. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com
FTR we acquired the "postgresql.expert" domain two days ago just after it was made publicly available. Like I said, DALIBO will continue to monitor the release of new gTLDs and we will try to get the ones that seem strategic for the us and the PostgreSQL community. And we will continue to transfer these domains to to the community. However we feel that the task of intercepting the new strategic gTLDs would be done more efficiently by the trademark owner itself. Regards,