ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Comment Submitted on .biz, .info, and .org contracts

  • To: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, icann board address <icann-board@xxxxxxxxx>, Paul Twomey <twomey@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Comment Submitted on .biz, .info, and .org contracts
  • From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:34:57 -0700
  • Cc: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
  • References: <20060729162517.28479.qmail@web53312.mail.yahoo.com> <44CBC8AC.2010509@cavebear.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Karl and all former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,

Good points and observations here again Karl.  If ICANN had listened
early on much if the mess the ICANN BoD and staff has created could
have been avoided.  I guess one could compare or relate ICANN
to the "Hamas" of the net.

Karl Auerbach wrote:

> Danny Younger wrote:
>
> > The registry operators of .biz, .info and .org deserve
> > to have the same contract with ICANN that is provided
> > to these other gTLD sponsoring organizations.
>
> I very much disagree.  I have several domain names in .com (Verisign)
> and .org (PIR) that have been there since well before there was a
> Network Solutions or a Verisign or and ICANN.
>
> Because of the recognition value that I have built into those names I
> am, as a practical matter, trapped in those TLDs.  I did not voluntarily
> accept their terms and conditions except to the degree that I could have
> avoided them only by not using the internet of that time at all.
>
> So I need and deserve protection against the organizations that now
> operates .com and .org.
>
> Now, those people in .biz and .info at least had a choice - not much of
> a choice, but a choice none the less.  As did people who came into .com
> and .org at a later time.
>
> To the degree that one can believe that .com, .biz, .org, and .info
> today are really in competition and really offer significantly different
> products then we can say that today's customers have a choice.
>
> Now, I don't believe that they really offer different products - ICANN's
> rules really make all of the name products essentially the same with
> only cosmetic differences (see my plans  for .ewe to see how things
> could be really different -
> http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000159.html )
>
> But nevertheless, those of us trapped in .com, because we had no
> alternative, deserve to be protected against Verisign.  The same can not
> be said, at least not to the same degree, about those who chose the
> newer TLDs.
>
> And in the future, if ICANN were to allow really different TLDs with
> really different business models and product characteristics, then that
> would create yet another tier of people who require even less protection
> those who are in today's .biz and .info.
>
> Ah, the mess that ICANN has created.
>
>                 --karl--

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827





<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>