🚀 go-pugleaf

Your observations about national and State (or even lower) "standing"
for a given organization to use a given name are right on the mark.

The US ANSI Procedures that have been adopted for OSI Organizational
Name Registration account for this by preregistering each State, the
District of Columbia, and all the (6-7) Outlying Areas (e.g., Guam,
Puerto Rica, etc) to become (sub)registration authorities for
organizations that only have standing in their jurisdictions.  

The next step in the problem then is to alert the states that they have
an obligation to OSI to establish (sub)registries for their
organizations (and citizens).  

Then, the rules are simple.  You apply for a name, which is published on
a "challenge" list.  if anyone challenges, the registration process stops
and waits for the challenger/applicant pair to resolve the challenge,
without any help from ANSI or the state (sub)registries.  

If after the challenge period closes, someone decides to challenge a
registered name, it is their privilege, but the name remains registered
until it is agreed that the challenger shall have the right to force
de-registration, or turnover of the registration to the challenger.
Again, this action is all taken in the normal legal context of
intellectual property rights, which includes litigation in the courts if
the challenger and the defendant so wish.  

Now then, all this seems quite rational, until we notice that some OSI
standards, like X.400 ORAddress Attribute Values require a single flat
national namespace.  (e.g., PRMD and ADMD Names) 

More on this in the next episode...\Stef