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

List:       nanog
Subject:    Re: ICANN and Verisign settle over SiteFinder
From:       "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin () law ! miami ! edu>
Date:       2005-10-27 19:15:20
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.62.0510271514470.2133 () osaka ! law ! miami ! edu
[Download RAW message or body]



they get a back-door amendment to their contract, with no public process, 
that extends it and allows them to charge more in the future

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Florian Weimer wrote:

>
> * Chris Woodfield:
>
>> Said the flowerpot: "Oh no, not again..."
>>
>> http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8DEL2TO7.htm?
>> campaign_id=apn_tech_down&chan=tc
>
> I don't understand what VeriSign receives in return for their kowtow
> (under the agreement, they basically waive any right to criticize
> ICANN's role).
>
> Two possible explanations:
>
>  * ICANN signalled a positive outcome of a future Sitefinder review
>    under the new process.
>
>  * ICANN promised to grant VeriSign the DNSSEC root and .ARPA
>    maintenance without tender (the "Root Server Management Transition
>    Agreement" goes into that direction; actually, the .ARPA stuff is
>    the interesting one).
>
>  * VeriSign has recognized that they couldn't win in court, and
>    suddenly want to play nice.
>

-- 
http://www.icannwatch.org   Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                        -->It's warm here.<--
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]