On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, Scott Weeks wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:---
From: Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As an, ahem, lawyer, I think what you do and how you do it matter a lot
...
Pulling a plug after reasonable/lots of warnings (did you miss
As an, ahem, lawyer, I think what you do and how you do it matter a lot
here. And it would be prudent to talk to someone who understood your
facts and situation before doing some of the things discussed in this
thread. (I won't be more specific for fear of sounding like I'm giving
legal
ah, but who timed what?
On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Tony Finch wrote:
The timing is interesting, given that DENIC and Nominet have recently come
to an agreement of sorts with ICANN.
Tony.
--
http://www.icannwatch.org Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
A. Michael Froomkin |Professor
they get a back-door amendment to their contract, with no public process,
that extends it and allows them to charge more in the future
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Chris Woodfield:
Said the flowerpot: Oh no, not again...
I don't think the root zone is sufficiently original to be
legally copyrightable. And we don't have database copyright in the US.
Even if it were copyrightable, it is made avaiable for download hence
there is good reason to assume an implied license.
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Peter Dambier
Not so. The idea of an opposition party suggests the editors of ICW have
some desire to be in control. Not at all.
Further, we run a slash server. Most of the content is contributed. We
don't have to go hunt for it.
If ICANN ran decent discussion boards, it would put us out o business.
Apologies for interrupting the rehash of the protocol wars, but, as a
sometime teacher of trademark law, I must protest.
Under US law at least, a trademark can only be sold as part of a larger
transfer of assets structured to include the goodwill. Typical
examples include: selling the
Just curious. How much would it differ from
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=icannwatch-20path=tg/detail/-/0262134128/qid%3D1041619276/sr%3D1-1
and
http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/icann.pdf
?
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Jonathan Slivko wrote:
Maybe try these guys?
see http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/18/0334236mode=nested
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Jon R. Kibler wrote:
OK, I have obviously missed something here... I know that the courts
dismissed the original complaint against ICANN, but what has happened
since, and what is this about some
The lawsuit is not premature to the extent that
1. VRSN were told (however justly) to cease and desist Site Finder 1.0 or
else face consequences.
2. VRSN were told they couldn't implement the Consolidate service
without making other concessions [according to the complaint the service
allowed
See Form and Substance in Cyberspace, 6 J. Small Emerging Bus. L. 93
(2002), available online
http://personal.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/formandsubstance.pdf
(especially pp. 119-122 (The role of the root server operators))
and more generally
Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to
11 matches
Mail list logo
