Roland and all,
In part I agree and have stated as much on this thread several times and in
several ways as well. However the substance of their case, is both relevant
and important as well. SOme may disagree with the pgMedia's desire
for so many gTLD's and/or claim to them, which I think is
WIlliam and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> > > No, not well known for that at all Jeff. I have never done anything you
> > > mention in this paragraph. You on the other hand
> >
> >Hum? That is not what your fromer employer stated clerly
William and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> > William and all,
> >Indeed this is true. But it could be made to LOOK differently in a court
> > of law. Couple that with the fact that Chris dropped his case, will weigh
> > to some unknown degree on the j
Bill and all,
Bill Lovell wrote:
> *At 09:11 PM 3/19/99 +, you wrote:
> >William and all,
> >
> > True enough. However by the same token it doesn't mean that the
> >appeal won't either. Hence the reason for a court of appeals, william.
> >In addition if there is more discovery, which is l
On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
>Well documented what William? I have made no agreements on
> any public forum to my knowledge. In addition it would be against
> my companies policy to do so, ad as they get every post that
Oh so now there are multiple companies? Do they also have myst
At 07:11 PM 3/19/99 -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:
>
>On 20-Mar-99 Gordon Cook wrote:
>> NTIA has not a shred of legally defensible authority to be doing what it is
>> doing. I have triple sourced this. But to challenge NTIA now you need a
>> legally agrieved party. With the PGMedia case now
On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> > No, not well known for that at all Jeff. I have never done anything you
> > mention in this paragraph. You on the other hand
>
>Hum? That is not what your fromer employer stated clerly
> William... Shall I repost that little piece o
The real problem is that pgMedia is hunting the wrong duck.
At 06:46 PM 3/19/99 -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:
>
>Doesn't mean the appeal has any more merit than the original case did.
>
>
>
>On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
>> Gordon and all,
>>
>>As you know, pgMedia has filed an appeal
William and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> >Well documented what William? I have made no agreements on
> > any public forum to my knowledge. In addition it would be against
> > my companies policy to do so, ad as they get every post that
>
> Oh so now
On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> William and all,
>Indeed this is true. But it could be made to LOOK differently in a court
> of law. Couple that with the fact that Chris dropped his case, will weigh
> to some unknown degree on the judges mind, should Chris and IOD,
> decides to revi
William and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> > William and all,
> >
> > William X. Walsh wrote:
> >
> > > I don't think PGMedia is a credible plaintiff, Jeff. I know you do (no
> > > surprise there in light of, well, that subject is for another time).
> >
> >
William and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> > William and all,
> >
> > William X. Walsh wrote:
> >
> > > On 20-Mar-99 Gordon Cook wrote:
> > > > NTIA has not a shred of legally defensible authority to be doing what it
> > > > is
> > > > doing. I have trip
On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> William and all,
>
> William X. Walsh wrote:
>
> > I don't think PGMedia is a credible plaintiff, Jeff. I know you do (no
> > surprise there in light of, well, that subject is for another time).
>
>I think the fact that pgMedia had the both the gut
William and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> I don't think PGMedia is a credible plaintiff, Jeff. I know you do (no
> surprise there in light of, well, that subject is for another time).
I think the fact that pgMedia had the both the guts to bring the case
in part, stands for itself as to thei
On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> William and all,
>
> William X. Walsh wrote:
>
> > On 20-Mar-99 Gordon Cook wrote:
> > > NTIA has not a shred of legally defensible authority to be doing what it
> > > is
> > > doing. I have triple sourced this. But to challenge NTIA now you need
> >
I don't think PGMedia is a credible plaintiff, Jeff. I know you do (no
surprise there in light of, well, that subject is for another time).
A more credible plaintiff will have more support and be able to make a more
convincing and compelling case. And the appropriate defendent is not NSI,
Jeff
William and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> On 20-Mar-99 Gordon Cook wrote:
> > NTIA has not a shred of legally defensible authority to be doing what it is
> > doing. I have triple sourced this. But to challenge NTIA now you need a
> > legally agrieved party. With the PGMedia case now histo
*At 09:11 PM 3/19/99 +, you wrote:
>William and all,
>
> True enough. However by the same token it doesn't mean that the
>appeal won't either. Hence the reason for a court of appeals, william.
>In addition if there is more discovery, which is likely in this particular
>case there is a whole
>Doesn't mean the appeal has any more merit than the original case did.
>
>
>
>On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
>> Gordon and all,
>>
>>As you know, pgMedia has filed an appeal.. So there is still an
>> agrieved party.
ahh, but no new facts or information can be added to an appeal. y
William and all,
True enough. However by the same token it doesn't mean that the
appeal won't either. Hence the reason for a court of appeals, william.
In addition if there is more discovery, which is likely in this particular
case there is a whole new case potentially.
William X. Walsh wrot
On 20-Mar-99 Gordon Cook wrote:
> NTIA has not a shred of legally defensible authority to be doing what it is
> doing. I have triple sourced this. But to challenge NTIA now you need a
> legally agrieved party. With the PGMedia case now history we don't
> presently have a legally aggrieve
Doesn't mean the appeal has any more merit than the original case did.
On 19-Mar-99 jeff Williams wrote:
> Gordon and all,
>
>As you know, pgMedia has filed an appeal.. So there is still an
> agrieved party.
>
> Gordon Cook wrote:
>
> > Someone asked: Why was NSI granted a two y
Gordon and all,
As you know, pgMedia has filed an appeal.. So there is still an
agrieved party.
Gordon Cook wrote:
> Someone asked: Why was NSI granted a two year extension to the
> Cooperative Agreement without an open re-bid? The end of the Cooperative
> Agreement wasn't something that j
Someone asked: Why was NSI granted a two year extension to the
Cooperative Agreement without an open re-bid? The end of the Cooperative
Agreement wasn't something that just snuck up and bit NTIA in the bottom
and said "surprise!".
Cook: NTIA wanted to rebid.
NSF saw no need to rebid.. It
Ellen Rony wrote:
>We had a good turnout for a two-hour meeting with Esther Dyson (ED).
Thanks Ellen! A wonderful overview.
-- Bret
25 matches
Mail list logo
