At 01:25 AM 1/22/99 -0800, you wrote:
>At 04:54 PM 1/21/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>Richard J. Sexton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>My longest standing argument with the manner in which Internic has been so
>>grotesquely mismanaged is that the data it holds is public, by virtue of its
>>amassing using public funds, and yet, it is impossible to purchase, beg,
>>borrow, cajole, or otherwise acquire a copy of it in any form other than to
>>harvest it online, one record at a time, through servers which are already
>>woefully inadequate to the task.
>>
>>Now NetSol has decided that a portion of the information is not to be
>>publically accessible on a per-record basis. Criminal.
>>
>>As a taxpayer, I call for an immediate release of the Internic Whois database
>>into the public domain and that it be made available to any and all via ftp
>>download.
>
>In the article "Government Ownership of Copyrights," 29 U.West L.A. L. Rev
>149-164 (1998), I have assailed such claims of copyright ownership. As many
>of you may know, NSI similarly claims to "own" .com, .org, .mil, .edu, which
>was also acquired as a contractor to NSF and supported from public funds.
>(The article was written in response to a policy of some time back in which
>the WIPO web page was full of links to data that were only to be accessed
>by USPTO personnel. That is no longer the case, meaning that either they
>saw the error of their ways or they just quit posting their kind of such data,
>period.)
>
>Bill Lovell
Please be more careful with your attributions. I didn't wrtie the above.
--
"That's why there is a Protocol SO. To decide what the next
number after 16 is." - Dixon (tinc)
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
