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

List:       nanog
Subject:    Re: Domain Name NASA.COM
From:       "William Allen Simpson" <wsimpson () greendragon ! com>
Date:       1997-07-12 12:59:36
[Download RAW message or body]

> RFC_Violation: You saw it here first!
> From: jamie@intuition.iagnet.net (Jamie Rishaw)
> I've been a longstanding cheerleader for the NIC, but
>
That was your first mistake.  Although what can one expect from someone
who brags about violating RFCs?


> Today, without notice, the InterNIC turned "off" the domain name NASA.COM,
> a domain which had been registered now for over two years.
>
May I suggest that your customer sue, not the FTC or NASA, but the
Internic for violation of the contract.  You paid a fee, they are
required to follow their own procedures.  You should be able to get
quite a bit for actual and punitive damages.

And you would be doing all the rest of us a service, by setting a
precedent.  We really cannot have Internic becoming an extension of the
US government, or making arbitrary actions.  But enforcement of
contracts generally requires a court.

As far as I can see, you wouldn't even have to prove that NASA.COM was
"in a manner reasonably calculated to convey the impression".  That
would be up to NASA and/or FTC, should Internic get them to come to the
court (third party cross complaint, perhaps).

Although, for curiousities sake, what did this NASA stand for, and what
was their product?

WSimpson@UMich.edu
    Key fingerprint =  17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26  DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
BSimpson@MorningStar.com
    Key fingerprint =  2E 07 23 03 C5 62 70 D3  59 B1 4F 5E 1D C2 C1 A2

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