Kent and all,
Fine. I want to see a projected breakdown of what that fee is to be
used for in detail if you please. I want the members to have final
approval of those uses on a per use basis.
Kent Crispin wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 1999 at 04:46:13AM +0000, William X. Walsh wrote:
> > On Sun, 20 Jun 1999 21:37:56 -0700, Kent Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >ICANN doesn't have a power to tax. It has the power to charge a
> > >fee, just like NSI does.
> >
> > A fee implies a service they are providing. ICANN is not supplying
> > any service to the domain name holders, but they are paying the fee.
>
> ICANN provides a service to the domain name holders, the registrars,
> and the registries -- it supports the infrastructure.
>
> > The courts ruled the infrastructure "fee" was a tax. I see nothing to
> > indicate this is any different than that.
>
> The infrastructure fund went to the USG. It did not pay for
> services -- in fact, it went in the bank. The ICANN fee in fact is
> mandated to be on a cost recovery basis, to cover the expenses of
> running the DNS infrastructure.
>
> --
> Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
