[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       inet-access
Subject:    Re: spam from the new TLDs.
From:       Patrick Greenwell <patrick () cybernothing ! org>
Date:       2001-03-31 23:57:50
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sat, 31 Mar 2001, William Sommers wrote:

> At 04:17 AM 3/31/01 -0800, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
> 
>  > The Internet has a long history of the concept of "running code",
>  > etc. ICANN is broken, and we've got running code.
> 
> Oooo, bad analogy.  ICANN operates neither registry nor registrar.  

I should know better than making analogies, because people generally spend
more time arguing the applicability of the analogy rather than the issues
themselves. ;-) 

In any case, I believe it is a reasonable analogy as I was not
referring to *actual code* but rather a structure which offers consumers
what they want: attractive namespace.

> You were a strong supporter of the IFWP (in concept), arguing FOR 
> separation of the administrative/oversight and operational functions, 
> arguing AGAINST the administrative body deriving income from the 
> transactional level.  That, uh... seems to have changed.

In a governance paradigm, when dealing with a monopolist absolutely. This
is not a governance paradigm, nor does New.net effectively own all the
namespace worth having. 
 
> [IIRC, though could certainly be wrong, you have also supported the 
> position of even $6 per gTLD-year being on the high side, if not outright 
> registry profiteering.  But I'll leave the several-fold increase issue 
> aside here.]

See above.
 
> I understand market-driven consensus for gTLDs.  Frankly, that's about all 
> I do understand about the New.Net model in terms of benefiting the Internet 
> community as a whole.  As I've been unable to clearly identify it on my own 
> while reading through the policies, what specifically has been improved in 
> the area of rights of the individual domain name holder?

Choice in the namespace and the lack of "sunrise" provisions for
starters. 

There is tremendous pressure from trademark interests regarding
their interests which may not be readily apparent and likewise may be very
easy to dismiss if you aren't the one receiving cease-and-desists on the
names individuals have registered, etc. I certainly don't expect any of
you to have the least bit of sympathy regarding this, but it is germane to
the conversation.

We are placed in the unfortunate position of having to going along with
"industry standards" regarding "reasonable behaviour" with respect to
trademarks in order to minimize the potential that we are held liable for
such things as contributary infringement, etc. Those standards right now
consist of the UDRP enabled by ICANN.


-
List archives can be found at: <http://www.moongroup.com/inet.php>
Send 'unsubscribe' in the body to 'list-request@inet-access.net' to leave.
Eat sushi frequently.   inet@inet-access.net is the human contact address.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]