At 07:59 AM 6/21/99 , Joe Sims wrote:
>
>Jay, all of a sudden you are awfully active for someone who has "washed
>his hands" of ICANN. But the increased level of activity has not improved
>the product,
How much better could it get ;-)
>which continues (I presume intentionally) to pay no attention
>to the real world. How much of the $70 fee (or really the $119 fee that
>NSI actually collects from many people) do you suppose goes toward
>promoting and protecting competition?
NSI is a public, for-profit corporation.
It has no such obligation.
>You might ask the testbed registrars
>how eager NSI is for new competition; the proper measure of NSI's
>dedication to a competitive environment (assuming anyone would really
>believe that they thought that was a good idea) is not its rhetoric but its
>actions, and so far its actions say clearly that NSI's goal is to preserve
>its monopoly position for as long as possible in any way it can.
NSI is a public, for-profit corporation.
It has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize
it's shareholders value using all legal means.
As an attorney, Joe, shouldn't you know this?
That said, I personally believe that NSI has
been too accommodating to your rouge ICANN agenda.
Instead of introducing competition, as you keep
claiming, ICANN has simply tried to regulate NSI,
and confiscate all intellectual property rights
in all TLDs.
If you want competition, then stop playing
word games and add some new TLD registries!
>As long
>as we are talking taxation without representation, how much say do you or
>anyone else have in NSI's fee, or how it is spent?
How much say do you or anyone else have in the
price of a Coke, or how it is spent? Frankly,
I don't get your point.
NSI is a public, for-profit corporation. Since
when is such a service offering subject to your
tampering?
>How much benefit are
>you (well, you may be a bad example) or others in the community getting
>from the monopoly profits that are fueling the multi-billion dollar market
>value of NSI?
Obviously, quite a large amount.
There are approximately 250 TLDs in existence today.
Approximately 100 of those are open and competitive.
Yet NSI receives more than half of all registrations.
They must be doing something right!
And that they are. They are competing by offering
clients a great value. Easy access, easy terms, broad
distribution, and toll-free operator support. Name one
other TLD that offers as many support services as NSI?
>Have they been passing out stock options to the Internet
>community?
Come on Joe,
What kind of attorney would expect a
public, for-profit corporation to give
away stock options. Get real.
>Exactly what has NSI done to promote a community discussion and
>attempt to reach community consensus on issues like dispute resolution;
NSI has participate in the ICANN formation process,
and frankly, they have put forward many good ideas
(almost all of which have been ignored by ICANN).
Case in point was the Paris Draft. That was a very
good attempt to structure a bottom-up, consensus driven
DNSO. Instead, we have a gerrymander DNSO that is nothing
less than a sham.
As for dispute resolution, I'll admit they have an
unpopular policy. Give them some true competition in
the form of some new TLDs, however, and I'll bet they
adapt in a hurry.
>last time I looked, I think NSI adopted a policy that advanced its
>interests and told people to take it or leave it. How many global
>discussions has NSI hosted, and paid for, so that interested persons around
>the world could participate in the policy debate?
You really need look no further than the header to this
email, for NSI has sponsored the DOMAIN POLICY mailing
list for years.
>How would you pay for
>all these efforts, and who would you suggest take them on?
Funny you should ask.
I and others have written about these topics for two
and a half years. Maybe its time you started to read
some of these community based ideas, instead of ramming
your own agenda down our collective throats.
>Or are you
>satisfied with the status quo -- maybe with the addition of a .per TLD? I
>have no doubt that you could comfortably coexist with NSI, as you have
>shown us throughout this process, but it is hard to see how that scenario
>benefits the rest of the Internet community.
I'm sure the peasants who revolted in St. Petersburg
felt the same way about competition and free markets ;-)
>I hope you will rethink your
>retirement and stick around; it is useful to have someone spout the NSI
>line in public, since they seem to prefer to do it in private.
I'm surprised you are having such a hard time with
this concept. Perhaps if you read it as written by
somebody else, you'll understand:
By Nick Patience
<snip>
Some have upped their involvement - or at least their volume of
email - in the past week or so, while others have become
disillusioned. One, Jay Fenello, president of would-be
registry, Iperdome Inc has had enough and has withdrawn from
the ICANN process because, he says ICANN has been "captured"
and the process is "unfair." He proposes to purse other
political channels, because, he says, this is not about domain
names, "it's a political fight."
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc.� 404-943-0524
-----------------------------------------------
What's your .per(sm)? http://www.iperdome.com
