Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-03-Speech-2-249"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010703.13.2-249"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, on behalf of my Group, I should like to give a very warm welcome to this report and to thank Mrs Flesch for her very comprehensive and detailed work, which shows her experience in the field. I should also like to pay particular tribute to Mrs McCarthy who I have worked with in the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market. Between our rapporteur and our draftsman, they produced a very sound report.
What is important about this report is that they have resisted the temptation to complicate what was basically a simple text proposed by the Commission. Essentially, Commissioner Liikanen, the word from Parliament is to go and get on with it. We do not want to over-complicate it. We have made some worthwhile improvements, but the fundamentals of what you proposed have been left unaltered.
That is important because, we must remember, the ".EU" domain name is actually a late entrant into a highly competitive and crowded market. It has to justify its existence. For it to be successful we want companies and organisations to use it. Therefore, the registration procedures have to be simple, easy and cost-effective. We must bear in mind that the policies and procedures adopted by the registry will need to reflect best practice in the field. Because we are coming into this late, there is no excuse for not getting it right. So some of the safeguards that both Mrs Flesch and Mrs McCarthy refer to, about protection of trademarks and avoidance of vexatious registration – cyber-squatting – are particularly important.
I want to highlight two particular issues of concern that I raised during the debate and was particularly pleased were reflected in the amendments. Mrs McCarthy referred to her amendment seeking to enable organisations with a prior title to a name to have a priority period of registration. That is very important. We do not want to disadvantage companies which are already active in this field which feel that they must protect themselves and want to take on the ".EU". We do not want them to feel that they are going to be held back in any way. They must have a priority period of registration to avoid this problem of vexatious registration, of people who just want to make a "quick buck" moving into that field and taking hold of that registration.
It will be very important for the new registry – and I direct this particularly to the Commission – that the launch date and the priority registration period are very well publicised throughout the European Union so that people understand those rights.
Secondly, we have to ensure that the ".EU" name does not, in any way, displace existing Member State domain names. I proposed an amendment, which I am pleased was accepted by my colleagues, that makes sure that the ".EU" registration is not empowered to issue any sub-domain names using Member State identities.
In conclusion, this is a worthwhile enhancement of the European Union's information society capabilities in a very fast-evolving world."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples