<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [ga] Has ICANN already forgotten or not recognized?
- To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: [ga] Has ICANN already forgotten or not recognized?
- From: "Karl E. Peters" <tlda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 20:02:29 -0700
<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000;
font-size:10pt;"><div> </div>
<div>Jeff and others concerned,</div>
<div> It seems that ICANN really believes it can opt out
of continuation of their agreements and commitments to the Dept. of Commerce /
NTIA and still keep all the rights and privileges that came with it. I hope,
pray, and will work hard to ensure, that ICANN would have to leave all it's US
granted authority and perks behind if they fail to extend their agreement
with the US Government that gave them to ICANN to begin with. I don't mind if
they go it alone, that is their choice, but who would they govern or extract
fees from then? Only those who like them more than the alternatives that will
be made know closer to the right time. No one will be constrained to work with
a toothless paper tiger that lacks the real strength of the appearance of the
US Government behind them. They will become more visibly irrelevant and
relegate themselves to being ONE OF the possible sources of guidance for those
who are willing to play the TLD lottery with them under horrendous terms and
conditions! (and then fork over fees for evey registered SLD so ICANN Board and
others can globe trot to all the finest hotels and bask in their
self-importance!) I just don't see where that is a good plan for ICANN. I am no
fan of this administration or of ICANN as it has become, but ICANN had better
remember who can pull their tail and make it hurt.</div>
<div>-Karl E. Peters, President</div>
<div>Top Level Domain Association, Inc.</div>
<div><BR><BR>All,<BR><BR>See: <a
href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/technology/"; target=_blank
mce_href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/technology/";>http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/technology/</a><BR><BR>Shouldn't
ICANN be on board here? Despite which side of<BR>the political spectrum any of
us are, seems to me and our members<BR>that ICANN should be working in these
stated agenda directions,<BR>instead of what it is, and has been
doing.<BR><BR>Just food for thought...<BR><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Spokesman for
INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)<BR>"Obedience of the
law is the greatest freedom" -<BR>Abraham Lincoln<BR>"YES WE CAN!" Barack (
Berry ) Obama<BR><BR>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not
with what is<BR>very often the accident of glory" - Theodore
Roosevelt<BR><BR>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the
burden, B;<BR>liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied
by<BR>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."<BR>United States v. Carroll Towing
(159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir.
1947]<BR>===============================================================<BR>Updated
1/26/04<BR>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS.<BR>div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.<BR>ABA member in good
standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail<BR>jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<BR>My Phone:
214-244-4827<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></div></span></body></html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|