Re: [ga-roots] Capture and Diversion (was Smart Browsers)

["L Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

And all the roots have studiously avoided duplicating .com because of 
the havoc it would create.  The major roots strive to resolve conflicts 
that have existed but ICANN chooses to introduce the biggest one yet.  

All TLDs and all roots exist using the DNS.  The FUD that you and 
ICANN produce will result only in the first major collision causing 
problems for all users in any TLD that is duplicated by ICANN now or in 
the future.  Your FUD will attempt to turn it around making it look like all 
others are causing the problem when it is the ICANN duplication(s) that 
will do it.  

ICANN may succeed in doing so.  The ensuing chaos will be more than 
interesting to watch.

You keep alluding to possible legislation to stop alternatives.  You 
assume that US legislation will take care of it.  Every time you bring 
that up, there is a negative reaction from the rest of the world due to the 
anti US-centric attitude.  Keep it up.

Instead of cooperating with entities globally, let's just continue to 
impose US values, laws and attitudes on the global community.  That 
will most certainly foster cooperation, NOT.  

Let's continue to thwart the small business market and users and drive 
more out of the US.  That will make the public really happy.  Let the 
ICANN tanks roll out and crush whatever is in the way, NOT.

You continue to claim an infinitessimal market share for the "alt.tlds."  
That market share is growing and you know it.  ISPs are using the roots 
more every day and consumers in the millions are now making the 
simple change.  FUD doesn't change facts.  An eleven percent market 
share may be small, but the numbers of users are not.  When you 
begin talking in the hundreds of thousands and millions, that small 
market share has a different meaning.

As for competition, taking a specific branded business product and 
selling it to someone else is not competition.  It is "taking."  If that is 
okay, I think someone should take .com and establish it out of Sea 
Island, fund it well and have a nice duplicate registry.  Sounds good to 
me.  I'd love a couple of really good, short, catchy .com domains.  For 
that matter, why not .net.  I'm sure someone would love another 
new.net.  After all, it's just competition.

Leah


On 4 May 2001, at 10:01, Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 10:37:30AM -0700, Kristy McKee wrote:
> > Yes, and if I'm understanding correctly; then we need a consensus about how 
> > the GA feels about participating with the other services, including those 
> > like New.net's.
> > 
> > I personally am not pleased with the idea that the ICANN can just take away 
> > anyones established business
> 
> It's called "competition".  You put up alternate roots in competition 
> with the real root.  That was a silly thing to do, perhaps, but 
> complaints about your own failure to compete effectively seem just a 
> bit self-serving.
> 
> > any time they please
> 
> You really meant to say "after more than a year of intense and
> controversy laden debate". 
> 
> > - it's not legal in the 
> > USA,
> 
> Of course it's legal.
> 
> > so I have difficulties understanding why ICANN would start off with 
> > this...
> 
> But you are a competitor to ICANN.  ORSC, TLDA, etc -- they are all 
> trying to set up a system in competition with ICANN.  There is nothing 
> illegal about that (though the special nature of the DNS root might 
> warrant an exception), just as there is nothing illegal about some 
> companies being forced out of business due to competition.  Happens all 
> the time.
> 
> Let's be clear:  What is in competition are different ways of managing 
> the root zone.
> 
> ICANN represents a particular system for managing the root zone.  It's a
> complex, unwieldy, and controversial system, but it has commanding
> market share, support (sometimes grudging) of governments, large
> business, the Internet engineering community, and other stakeholders. 
> It has baroque representational structures, and it has complex rules
> regarding international involvement.  
> 
> ORSC, TLDA, and all the other alternate root organizations advocate
> their competing systems for managing the root zone, and implement their
> own strategies in their own versions of the root zone.  They
> collectively command an infinitesimal market share, and have only the
> support of a tiny comunity of would-be registry operators.  (New.net is
> an interesting possible exception, but even some alternate root
> proponents believe that they are merely a transient). 
> 
> People who set up registries in the alternate roots are betting that 
> their scheme of root-zone management will prevail.  This is a
> very high risk entrepreneurial activity -- if you win, the payoff will 
> be huge, but the odds of winning are very small.  
> 
> -- 
> Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
> kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html