Who owns whitehouse.com? Should that entity now have a right to "White House" as a trademark and, in the case of this discussion, @whitehouse on Twitter, on the basis of owning that domain?
Yes, but the domain registration process is just another "registration process". The domain one is "modern" (inexpensive, online, self-service), the trademark one (USPTO) is "old" ("manual", "offline", "cumbersome", "expensive").
Why should the government get whitehouse.com - they are entitled to whitehouse.gov. Are you saying governments should have precedence over the priority of other entities?
Since we are discussing here, an international trademark system, I think the properties of the domain registration system are much preferred to the properties of the fragmented and ill-defined international trademark process.
I believe what they're trying to say is that .com is a completely arbitrary demarcation.
Are you saying that a .com should have precedence over the priority of a .org, .edu, or .co.uk? Should Harvard Book Store (harvard.com) be somehow entitled to @harvard over Harvard University (harvard.edu)?
Not to mention that more than one business can have the same name (if they are registered in different categories), but only one person can own a .com.
Examples:
Live with Regis and Kelly
Windows (or XBox) Live
Live (the band)
BBC Radio 5 Live
