On Sun, Jul 25, 1999 at 11:27:25PM +0100, Michael Froomkin wrote:
> That's strange. When I raised anti-trust questions to Joe Sims a while
> ago (in the context of whether ICANN's suggestions that the registries
> should voluntarily club together and have identical dispute policies) he
> assured me the issues were clear-cut and there were no problems. (Alas,
> for some reason, I was unable to follow his somewhat abbreviated
> explanation as to why this was.) [That's irony, folks.]
1) The fact that particular issues might be clear-cut vis a vis
anti-trust certainly does not imply that *all* issues are clear-cut
vis a vis anti-trust.
2) The fact that you, a lawyer, would raise such a question does seem
to indicate that it is worthy of research.
3) The cases may have been clear-cut because the research was done.
4) Finally, given that all lawyers do not have the same expertise,
the particular issues in question may indeed be clear-cut to Joe
Sims, but fall in a void in your understanding. This would be
consistent with your inability to follow his telegraphed explanation.
I do notice, incidentally, that Mr Sims approach to the law seems
very practically oriented, and yours seems very theoretical.
I'm sorry, I didn't catch the irony. Perhaps you were a bit too
subtle?
--
Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
