RE: [dow1-2tf] Moving forward on "conspicuous notice"?

["Cade,Marilyn S - LGCRP" <mcade@xxxxxxx>]

Courtesy and mutual respect is always a good recipe for working together, mixed 
with professionalism and a little  humor! 

I'm  not  having much fun at the ITU WTSA, so I may be unable to contribute any 
humor! 
But I'll try on the courtesy, mutual respect, and professionalism! 



-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Harris [mailto:harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 11:05 AM
To: Cade,Marilyn S - LGCRP; Milton Mueller; tim@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
metalitz@xxxxxxxx; tom@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [dow1-2tf] Moving forward on "conspicuous notice"?


What Marilyn says is true. ISPs do many of the registrations
for their customers in Argentina, and often act as proxy
registrants.

BTW for Milton's benefit, I dont consider Tim's comments
to be "naive". In the search for middle consensus ground
between the two extremes in our discussions, it might be
more constructive if we avoid qualifying other people's
opinions, perhaps out of simple politeness.

Tony Harris

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cade,Marilyn S - LGCRP" <mcade@xxxxxxx>
To: "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@xxxxxxx>; <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
<metalitz@xxxxxxxx>; <tom@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 1:35 AM
Subject: RE: [dow1-2tf] Moving forward on "conspicuous notice"?


>
>
> As to your question, Milton, there are different reasons why someone wants
to use a domain name, and indeed it is possible that a business, or an NGO,
or non profit might decide to use a name, registered to someone else, but
"loaned" to them as usable space. Some may view that it may not be the best
practice unless the "user" has an agreement/contract in writing, since they
will be making an investment on the content, and counting on maintaining the
access to the name space, however, I would not be surprised to hear about
such models.
>
> Tim's posting was informative and I think we would all benefit from
hearing more from him.
>
> However, just on a personal contribution I can make, but Maggie might
elaborate on, many ISPs provide web pages for use by their registrants,
without the registration of a domain name. The AT&T consumer ISP provides
several web pages for use by their subscribers.  Many others do as well.
>
>
> 202-360-1196 c
> mcade@xxxxxxx
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 5:51 PM
> To: tim@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> metalitz@xxxxxxxx; tom@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [dow1-2tf] Moving forward on "conspicuous notice"?
>
>
> Tim:
>
> Please explain to me how you can "have a domain name"
> without registering it through an ICANN-accredited registrar.
>
> Your message rather naively implies that the "caveats and
> responsibilities" associated with a domain name were
> created by God or the laws of physics. I'm sure you know
> better than that. They were imposed by ICANN accreditation
> contracts. ICANN has a monopoly over the root, and, due
> to the dominance of certain interest groups over ICANN
> policies, it uses that monopoly power to impose certain
> conditions on registrants.
>
> In short, you are not "choosing" the responsibilities
> and caveats, they are imposed on you. Ask your lawyer
> what a "contract of adhesion" is and you'll understand
> what I'm talking about.
>
> >>> Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx> 10/3/2004 12:00:52 PM >>>
>
> Not that I'm not somewhat sympathetic to your argument, but it doesn't
> really hold water. Becoming the actual registrant of a domain name does
> has certain *caveats* attached, if you will. However, it is not the only
> way to have a domain name, make use of it, or have a web site. You have
> choices. If you choose to register the name as your own, you are
> choosing the responsibilities and caveats that come along with it.
>
>
>
>