Bill and all,
Bill, in some ways I can agree with you conclusion, " if you don't want to
pay
the fee, don't use the service". The problem with this answer/suggestion is
that that Fee/Tax, is one that is being levied by an entity that does not have
the authority to charge such a fee/tax on the use of a public resource
(Domain Name Registration) that the public has already paid for once,
and to date it is the Registrar that is providing the service, not ICANN
itself. Hence it appears that the Registrar is paying ICANN twice,
$5000.00 for a license or registration agreement and again for each
Domain it registers, and oh yes BTW, you must pay in advance
to boot. There is also the problem that ICANN is possibly going to
get control of the Root structure and registry for com. net, and .org.
That being the case, which means that at that potential time
there is for all practical purposes, no real competition. Now
the potential Registrant is stuck with having no choice. That is
not going to fly very well.
So, the circle continues....
Bill Lovell wrote:
> At 10:36 PM 6/20/99 -0800, you wrote:
> >Kent Crispin wrote:
> >
> >>ICANN doesn't have a power to tax. It has the power to charge a
> >>fee, just like NSI does.
> >>
> >What are the legal definitions of a tax and a fee? It seems that the two
> >terms are being used here interchangeably to suit individual arguments.
> >There must be some objective criteria that applies to each.
>
> An excellent question, Ellen!! One simple answer is that they are
> whatever the relevant statute says they are. And in fact, that is
> often the case. In my original letter I noted a case in which that
> was not true: the "fee" imposed for handicapped parking permits
> was deemed by the courts to be a tax, but that was only for the
> special purpose of recogizing the intent of Congress: people who
> are handicapped cannot be charged extra for the extra need, and
> calling the charge a "fee" does not let it slip by.
>
> A more general answer is based upon the destination of the funds:
> taxes go into the general budget, but fees are directed into the
> agency that collected them, as a way of cost recovery. You pay
> a fee to go to a park; that money provides maintenance to the
> park. I pay patent application fees for my clients; those funds
> run the USPTO. (Incidentally, those fees have mostly all gone
> down recently: Congress mandated that the USPTO be self-
> supporting, and the USPTO had to raise fees to stay alive since
> the Congress Critters started dipping into the funds received
> for pork barrel purposes; evidently the pork stopped because
> the fees were largely reduced. Sometimes government works.)
> But back to the story: fees are often referred to as user fees,
> which suggest an immediate quid pro quo, and, at least
> theoretically, that's the difference between the meanings of
> taxes and fees.
> I don't remember any clarion cries of "No fees without
> representation" -- if you don't want to pay the fee, don't
> use the service. And so much for Revolutionary War
> hyperbole.
>
> (Kent: I'm so glad that you've come around to my way of
> thinking. HAHAHAHAHA!) :-)
>
> Bill Lovell
> >
> >
> >Ellen Rony Co-author
> >The Domain Name Handbook ____ http://www.domainhandbook.com
> >======================== ^..^ )6 =============================
> >ISBN 0879305150 (oo) -^-- +1 (415) 435-5010
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] W W Tiburon, CA
> > Dot com is the Pig Latin of the Information Age.
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
