[IFWP] [Fwd: ICANN Names Eight New Post-Testbed Registrars]

All, I hope everyone has seen this or will read it. 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 75

Re: [IFWP] Re: Policy proposal (was: use of domain name...

Kerry and all, Kerry Miller wrote: > Pisanty, > > > In the consultation on WIPO RFC-3 in Mexico at least one clar legal > > opinion did distinguishbetweeen the holding of a domain name and its use. > > According to this lawyer the onlymoment when you sep into intellectual or > > industrial p

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

Tony and all,   I am afraid I must agree that ICANN has attempted to paint NSI in a less that honest light of too many occasions.  This has been the mantra mostly of Mike Roberts, CEO ICANN Interim Board that has been borne out in his own public statements that has been on more than one occasions

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

Kim and all, Kim, though you and I disagree on many many things, in this particular instance I am complete agreement with you. I have often wondered why and where Dave Crocker comes up with his revisionist version of historic events. Much of this sort of rancor from some circles in a very n

[IFWP] [Fwd: [Membership] My impression on MAC meeting - some lessons]

All, I thought that this might be well worth reading regarding the Berlin meeting for those that did not or could not attend. Very interesting indeed!! Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-M

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

Sorry Dave, you seem to try to bring attention back to a discussion of NSI in general, whcih again in itself was a distractor. The subject was the subject, so to speak, ie the discussion was about use of domain names. Alejandro Pisanty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Re: [IFWP] Insulting remarks from the crok.... minister of propaganda for ICANN Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

On Tue, 25 May 1999 22:03:21 -0400, Gordon Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >>And, of course, all this distracts nicely from rather more substantive >>points that were raised. In case those with millisecond spans of attention >>have forgotten: >> Sorry Gordon, but criticism only where c

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

from the NSI statement The increased activity, with the corresponding growth of > operating costs, have resulted in funding requirements exceeding the > National Science Foundation's budget. In addition, it is appropriate that > Internet users, instead of the U.S. Federal Government, pay the cost

[IFWP] Insulting remarks from the crok.... minister of propaganda forICANN Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> > >And, of course, all this distracts nicely from rather more substantive >points that were raised. In case those with millisecond spans of attention >have forgotten: > The COOK Report on Internet | New handbook just

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 09:00 PM 5/25/99 -0400, A.M. Rutkowski wrote: I can speak first hand that charging was discussed, the >amount considered, and the implementation urged wy >before NSI raised the issue in 1995. And, of course, all this distracts nicely from rather more substantive points that were raised.

[IFWP] Re: Policy proposal (was: use of domain name...

Pisanty, > In the consultation on WIPO RFC-3 in Mexico at least one clar legal > opinion did distinguishbetweeen the holding of a domain name and its use. > According to this lawyer the onlymoment when you sep into intellectual or > industrial property infringement is when you use the domai

[IFWP] Chomsky: Who runs the Internet?

(From the Activist Mailing List - http://get.to/activist "Who runs America? Forty minutes with Noam Chomsky" Interview by Adrian Zupp ... I don't see why we have to have a system in which the wealth that gets created is directed, overwhelmingly, to a tiny percentage of the population. Nor do I

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

Ellen, My recollection, based on a document I cannot find at the moment, was that NSI initiated the request to charge a $50 per year domain name registration fee, and NSIF accepted the proposal, implemented as Amendment 4 of the Cooperative Agreement. I can speak first hand that charging was disc

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> Since I prefer written record to aging and fallible memory, here is how NSI > explained the need to impose payments, in its "Fee for Registration of > Domain Names" (September 13, 1995), which is included on the CD-ROM that is > bound with the Domain Name Handbook. Was the following NSI or NSF

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> I also vaguely recall that the initial contract had a > provision for authorization of charges. Yes, the original Cooperative Agreement does mention the possibility of per-registration charges. --karl--

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

Somewhere in the namedroppers archive is some text from NSI that explains the reasoning for NSF authorizing NSI to start charging for registrations. I don't remember the exact text, but it seems very similar to what Ellen Rony wrote. I also vaguely recall that the initial contract had a provision

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

Gordon Cook wrote: >karl your assertion is false. When the rates increased, NSF had to pay for >every domain name. it had established a limited budget to do this. NSF >INITIATED the charging.NOT NSIand the agreement warned that >charging might start before it was done. My recollection,

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

karl auerbach: >When the rate increased, NSI asked, and NSF granted, a change that would >increase NSI's profits, but not increase NSI's risk. You don't have a clue. I guess the facts just don't matter to you when it's so much more interesting to make stuff up. Enough! Kim karl your assertion

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

On Tue, May 25, 1999 at 01:54:42PM -0700, Karl Auerbach wrote: > > > "Hegemony over the core parts..." In reality, that's all of > > 3 TLD zone files. There's 246 other TLD zone files. There's > > one million other zone files - several of which are bigger > > than NSI's. > > Most of those oth

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> >Any somebody needs to award Tony Gomes a medal for keeping his temper > >(and doing a fine job) in what must be one of the most stressful contexts > >to be found on the net. > > That's Chuck Gomes...or was that a freudian slip ;-) Oops, yup, Chuck Gomes. But as Shakespeare says (sort-of):

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

On Tue, 25 May 1999 16:22:40 -0400, "A.M. Rutkowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >At 03:32 PM 5/25/99 , Karl Auerbach wrote: > >>However, NSI's continued hegemony over the core parts of the DNS is also a >>threat to the the net. > >"Hegemony over the core parts..." In reality, that's all of >3 TL

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 01:34 PM 5/25/99 -0700, Karl Auerbach wrote: > >Any somebody needs to award Tony Gomes a medal for keeping his temper >(and doing a fine job) in what must be one of the most stressful contexts >to be found on the net. That's Chuck Gomes...or was that a freudian slip ;-) > >So, despite my tone

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> >However, NSI's continued hegemony over the core parts of the DNS is also a > >threat to the the net. > > "Hegemony over the core parts..." In reality, that's all of > 3 TLD zone files. There's 246 other TLD zone files. There's > one million other zone files - several of which are bigger >

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> I was not commenting on whether NSI is or is not an entreprenureal > company. I was disagreeing with Crocker's statement that NSI did not > have to build an infrastructure...according to him everything was just > handed to them one day and the next day they started raking in the > dough. Ther

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 03:32 PM 5/25/99 , Karl Auerbach wrote: However, NSI's continued hegemony over the core parts of the DNS is also a threat to the the net. "Hegemony over the core parts..."  In reality, that's all of 3 TLD zone files.  There's 246 other TLD zone files.  There's one million other zone files - se

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 01:00 PM 5/25/99 -0700, you wrote: >At 03:46 PM 5/25/99 -0400, Kim Hubbard wrote: >>I love this...Dave Crocker actually telling someone to act professional. >>:-) Too much!! > >Yup. It means that I know how to respond to the kind of crap you are >generating, in kind. Yup, very professional.

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

Karl, I was not commenting on whether NSI is or is not an entreprenureal company. I was disagreeing with Crocker's statement that NSI did not have to build an infrastructure...according to him everything was just handed to them one day and the next day they started raking in the dough. Kim

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 03:46 PM 5/25/99 -0400, Kim Hubbard wrote: >I love this...Dave Crocker actually telling someone to act professional. >:-) Too much!! Yup. It means that I know how to respond to the kind of crap you are generating, in kind. However, some have noticed that I try to rein it in most of the tim

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

I love this...Dave Crocker actually telling someone to act professional. :-) Too much!! Kim At 12:29 PM 5/25/99 -0700, Dave Crocker wrote: >At 02:53 PM 5/25/99 -0400, Kim Hubbard wrote: >> >Everyone involved noted how when NSI took over, the quality of service >> >substantially declined. >> >

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 02:53 PM 5/25/99 -0400, Kim Hubbard wrote: > >Everyone involved noted how when NSI took over, the quality of service > >substantially declined. > >Wow! you talked to everyone? Did you take an online poll or just called >everyone up? Well, Kim, that's constructively toned, to focus on the impo

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> The institutions, regulations, taxes, licensing, and claims > being advanced by ICANN and its GAC are broad and far reaching. They > are what threaten the Internet, not NSI. I quite agree that the ICANN issues are very serious. However, NSI's continued hegemony over the core parts of t

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> >When the rate increased, NSI asked, and NSF granted, a change that would > >increase NSI's profits, but not increase NSI's risk. > > You don't have a clue. I guess the facts just don't matter to you when > it's so much more interesting to make stuff up. Nobody is making things up. NSI had,

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 02:28 PM 5/25/99 -0400, A.M. Rutkowski wrote: >Karl, > >It's obvious that you and a few others on this list >have alternative ideological constructs of the universe >surrounding Network Solutions. Those of use who were There is nothing ideological or philosophical about statements and mis-st

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 11:08 AM 5/25/99 -0700, Karl Auerbach wrote: [snip] > >Everyone involved noted how when NSI took over, the quality of service >substantially declined. Wow! you talked to everyone? Did you take an online poll or just called everyone up? > >In other words, NSI didn't bring anything new to the

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

Karl, It's obvious that you and a few others on this list have alternative ideological constructs of the universe surrounding Network Solutions. Those of use who were actually part of this activity and dealing with these issues since 1992 have a different set of experiences and knowledge base.

[IFWP] ICANN Berlin Meeting

>From our end, the webcast of the DNSO and GAC open meetings appears to have worked well. Today's notes and audio and video recordings, along with online comments received (the scribe's notes include replies to them from the meeting), are available online from

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> >What NSI has done is to feed at the government trough. And they did it > >based on an existing service built by others. They can't even take the > >credit for creating the service they now profit from. > > Dave, you don't know what you're talking about. The "existing service" you > keep

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> >I certainly find it hard to justify allowing NSI to retain its unfair > >advantage on the basis that after a great deal of investment and work, a > >big competitor may possibly, maybe arise. > > Unfair? It was NSI's risk, investment, and entrepreneurship What risk -- NSI had a cost+fee cont

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

Dave, At 09:06 AM 5/25/99 -0700, Dave Crocker wrote: >At 10:54 AM 5/25/99 -0400, A.M. Rutkowski wrote: >Unfair? It was NSI's risk, investment, and entrepreneurship >>over the past six years that built their segment of the >>business. They've agreed and are proceeding rapidly to > >NSI had no ri

Re: [IFWP] latest ICANN pronouncement

At 09:29 AM 5/25/99 -0400, A.M. Rutkowski wrote: >It's worth noting, however, that as to your own preference of >organizational constructs, the bodies you reference have >stridently opposed the Internet's development over many years - Well, is certainly would be constructive to pursue this line o

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 10:54 AM 5/25/99 -0400, A.M. Rutkowski wrote: Unfair? It was NSI's risk, investment, and entrepreneurship >over the past six years that built their segment of the >business. They've agreed and are proceeding rapidly to NSI had no risk and made no entrepreneurial investment. By the time they

[IFWP] ICANN and conflicting paradigms of Internet history

"A.M. Rutkowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Craig McTaggart wrote: >>For ICANN to work, it needs to acquire the kind of legitimacy which ANSI and >>ISO enjoy. That is, recognition by all (okay, almost all) parties involved, >>based on widespread confidence that it can impartially carry out

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> At 10:16 AM 5/25/99 , Karl Auerbach wrote: > >I certainly find it hard to justify allowing NSI to retain its unfair > >advantage on the basis that after a great deal of investment and work, a > >big competitor may possibly, maybe arise. > > Unfair? It was NSI's risk, investment, and entreprene

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 10:16 AM 5/25/99 , Karl Auerbach wrote: >I certainly find it hard to justify allowing NSI to retain its unfair >advantage on the basis that after a great deal of investment and work, a >big competitor may possibly, maybe arise. Unfair? It was NSI's risk, investment, and entrepreneurship over

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> >It will remain the NSI Godzilla among the seven dwarfs. > > Great visualization tags, but "dwarf" is a hard one > to pin on AOL and France Telecom. I certainly find it hard to justify allowing NSI to retain its unfair advantage on the basis that after a great deal of investment and work, a b

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 09:35 AM 5/25/99 , Karl Auerbach wrote: >It will remain the NSI Godzilla among the seven dwarfs. Great visualization tags, but "dwarf" is a hard one to pin on AOL and France Telecom. These folks and their partners are huge, have major bucks, and own a lot of customers - not to mention Verio

Re: [IFWP] latest ICANN pronouncement

Craig, For ICANN to work, it needs to acquire the kind of legitimacy which ANSI and ISO enjoy.  That is, recognition by all (okay, almost all) parties involved, based on widespread confidence that it can impartially carry out its work in the public interest. There is more than one kind of 'priva

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

> >(I do believe that NSI ought to be required to act in some affirmative way > >to diminish some of its preferential position vis a vis any new > >registrars/registries that may try to arise. I'm not particularly willing > >to bet that such a thing would occur, however.) > > If you look at the

Re: [IFWP] latest ICANN pronouncement

A.M. Rutkowski wrote: > Someone should let the new ICANN-IANA know that > their statement: > >"...a table known as ISO-3166-1, which is > maintained by an agency of the United Nations." > > is not accurate. The Organization for International > Standardization (ISO) is a private standards

Re: [IFWP] use of domain name, and infringement

At 01:07 AM 5/25/99 , Karl Auerbach wrote: (I do believe that NSI ought to be required to act in some affirmative way to diminish some of its preferential position vis a vis any new registrars/registries that may try to arise.  I'm not particularly willing to bet that such a thing would occur, ho