Re: [ga] ALAC Statement on SiteFinder's Suspension

["John Palmer" <jp@xxxxxxxx>]

Thank you, Michael. We in the Inclusive Namespace have supported thousands of
TLDs in our various root server networks with no problem whatsoever. The shortage
is artificial and it supported by ICANN whose real goal is protect the monopolistic
financial interests of four organizations. 

After you look through all of their flowery language about "a bottom-up, consensus
driven organization" (hahahahahaha - that's hilarious) and look at their ACTIONS and
not their words, you are left with the words of a famous politician who said "follow
the money". I'll give you a hint - it does NOT lead to the individual billion or so internet
citizens - it leads back to four organizations (3 corporations and WIPO) who are 
attempting, and have succeeded to some extent, in hijacking the internet namespace
for their own narrow special interests to the detriment of the rest of the internet 
community. 

Again, I shouldn't have to remind folks, but ICANN's monopoly becomes just an illusion if 
end users would only change their Internet settings and ISP's would only respond
to the growing concern of their customers by changing their root cache files to point
to a truly free and lush namespace. The coolest thing about it is ITS FREE and
doesn't take but two minutes effort. Thats why the Inclusive Namespace is
growing - up to 28% of the internet by some estimates. Hold tight folks - the
long ICANN nightmare will soon be over. Critical mass is just around the corner.

John
See www.open-rsc.org for more information or try 199.5.157.128 if you need a name server
that REFUSES to be a slave to the corrupt monopoly.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Vittorio Bertola" <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 07:25
Subject: Re: [ga] ALAC Statement on SiteFinder's Suspension


> I missed the discussion of the draft version of this statement.  Could you
> point me to the relevant archives please?
> 
> I think the statement is fundamentally misguided, since it fails to point
> our that the reason .com matters so much is the artificial shortage of
> gTLDs.  The interent tolerated similar behaviors from a large number of
> ccTLDs without rebellion.  This one mattered due to size and centrality.
> 
> 
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
> 
> > At Large Advisory Committee Statement on SiteFinder's Suspension
> > 
> > 
> > The ALAC welcomes ICANN's decision to remind Verisign of its
> > obligations to run its registries for the public good, and
> > VeriSign's compliance with ICANN's demand to shut down SiteFinder.
> > 
> > SiteFinder's suspension was necessary not only because it broke
> > hundreds of specific applications, and because it was forced on
> > Internet users around the globe without any advance consultation or
> > notice: SiteFinder also needed to be stopped because it broke with
> > the end-to-end architecture of the Internet to give one company
> > monopolistic control of a resource in the center. It's not a
> > contest between SiteFinder's search page and MSN's, but between
> > giving VeriSign sole, centralized control of the error-handling
> > for incorrect URLs and distributing that choice among users and
> > applications at the edge of the network. The question is whether
> > users can choose what services fit their needs best, or whether
> > Verisign can take that choice away from users, forcing them to do
> > what's best for Verisign's commercial benefit.
> > 
> > Sitefinder affects not only the web, but most other applications
> > running on the net.  The question here is whether the network is
> > kept open for new protocols and applications, or whether it's left
> > to Verisign to decide which applications the Internet supports well.
> > 
> > Keeping SiteFinder out of the center leaves the greatest flexibility
> > in the network for those who want to innovate by adding new
> > protocols, services, and features at the ends.
> > 
> > ICANN has called for "further evaluation and study" of the impact of
> > SiteFinder. The proper question for VeriSign to consider is whether it
> > will reimplement its advertiser-supported search as an option at the
> > edge of the network -- where users can elect or decline to use it at
> > their will -- or not at all.
> > 
> > 
> > ====
> > About the ALAC: The At Large Advisory Committee advises ICANN on the
> > needs and interests of individual Internet users.
> > More information can be found at http://alac.icann.org/
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> http://www.icannwatch.org   Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
> A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@xxxxxx
> 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 hot here.<--
> 
> 
>