Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1333
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Wednesday, July 17 2002          Volume 01 : Number 1333

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 16:25:03 -0400
From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Snapnames partner comes out against Verisign's WLS

Its my read that the registry constituency is stuck between a rock and a
hard place.

Neulevel and Afilias have both (or are very close to) introducing a
number of new registry services. And you know what? None of them (that
I'm aware of at least) require access to the monopoly database in order
to be pushed out to the market. The problem with the policy debate thus
far is that it hasn't spent any time considering that there are registry
services that don't require a second look and those that do. My
preference is that the DNSO focus exclusively defining a policy that
strictly deals with the introduction of registry services that provide
the registry operator with undue benefit or preference because of their
monopoly control of the relevant TLD database. Those that don't benefit
from the control of the database should be simply included in the
contract by the staff without a second thought.

Hopefully this idea can get some traction before the board votes on the
subject. I fear that the registry constituency has been forced into an
uncomfortable spot because of this lack of granularity in the policy
examination.

                       -rwr

"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- - Steven Wright

Please review our ICANN Reform Proposal:
http://www.byte.org/heathrow

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf 
> Of George Kirikos
> Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 1:47 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: [ga] Snapnames partner comes out against Verisign's WLS
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Trouble in paradise? See:
> 
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-transfer/Arc00/msg00370.html

"Yet, I am advocating against the very policy that SnapNames endorses
and from which my company would benefit, simply because it is an unfair
policy. It eliminates competition. Were the task force to accept my
perspective and reject Verisign's proposal, my firm would lose money -
but I am proposing just that. The Verisign proposal is an exercise of
unfair trade practice and unfair restraint of trade."

"It continues to make attempts to establish (or re-establish) its
monopoly in at least some portions of the domain namespace. The current
WLS proposal constitutes nothing more than another such attempt. I
ardently reject  and urge you to reject  any proposal which limits
competition. Such limitations do not serve the consumer."

Kudos to @Com for their courage in supporting competition, and not
following others blindly. I wonder if those in the gTLD registry
constituency are capable of such independent thought and opinion, or are
they all lemmings led by their masters at Verisign?

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes http://autos.yahoo.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 13:29:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] NSI: "any domain name could be unilaterally cancelled"

Hello,

For those following the SEX.com case:

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020716/fltu015_1.html

"Network Solutions repeatedly asserted in the District Court and in
other courts that domain names are not property and any domain name
could be unilaterally cancelled by Network Solutions at their will."

Is that Network Solutions the registrar, or the registry??!!??

And I thought the Divine Right of Kings philosophy ended a few
centuries ago....

Ironically, Gary Kremen keeps the domain SEX.com registered at NSI,
instead of transferring to another registrar who might be "safer", i.e.
has Registrar lock, etc.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 13:40:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Snapnames partner comes out against Verisign's WLS

Hi Ross,

- --- "Ross Wm. Rader" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> to be pushed out to the market. The problem with the policy debate
> thus
> far is that it hasn't spent any time considering that there are
> registry
> services that don't require a second look and those that do. My
> preference is that the DNSO focus exclusively defining a policy that
> strictly deals with the introduction of registry services that
> provide
> the registry operator with undue benefit or preference because of
> their
> monopoly control of the relevant TLD database. Those that don't

Excellent point. Long ago, that was one of my main criticisms, i.e.
leveraging the existing monopoly to takeover an existing market, to the
detriment of consumers and other marketplace participants.

If we need a simple "litmus test", that would be mine, which WLS fails
miserably.

If VGRS had proposed something like Managed DNS as a registry offering,
e.g. 

    http://www.verisigndns.com/ 

folks wouldn't be concerned at all (by the way, it looks like a good
product, Verisign, however healthy discounts for multiple domains and
private-branded nameservers would be needed to get me to sign
on....maybe UltraDNS will do something like that one day....). That
kind of product doesn't leverage the monopoly, so is fine.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 15:49:57 -0500
From: "John Palmer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] NSI: "any domain name could be unilaterally cancelled"

I know I've said it 1,000 times, but:

NONE OF YOU HAVE TO USE THE USG/ICANN ROOTS.

If you don't like what they are doing, we can all together vote with
our feet. 

There are others out there. 

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "George Kirikos" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:29 PM
Subject: [ga] NSI: "any domain name could be unilaterally cancelled"

> Hello,
> 
> For those following the SEX.com case:
> 
> http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020716/fltu015_1.html
> 
> "Network Solutions repeatedly asserted in the District Court and in
> other courts that domain names are not property and any domain name
> could be unilaterally cancelled by Network Solutions at their will."
> 
> Is that Network Solutions the registrar, or the registry??!!??
> 
> And I thought the Divine Right of Kings philosophy ended a few
> centuries ago....
> 
> Ironically, Gary Kremen keeps the domain SEX.com registered at NSI,
> instead of transferring to another registrar who might be "safer", i.e.
> has Registrar lock, etc.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
> http://autos.yahoo.com
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 
> 

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 13:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Why Bret Fausett likes WLS?

Hello,

- --- "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> > Among several single supporters who do not
> > seem to be connected to Verisign/Snapnames I was very surprised to
> see Bret
> > Fausett,
> 
> Maybe.  Maybe not.  I don't know.
> 
> http://www.snapnames.com/press_clePR.html

> this conference. A few of the noted speakers include:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> Bret Fausett, partner, Hancock Rothert & Bunshoft LLP

I saw that a few months ago too (Google search of "SnapNames" and
"Fausett" catches that page :) ). I think it would depend on whether
Bret got paid or not for his appearance there....and whether in his own
mind he felt that he'd be less likely to be invited to be an "expert"
on these kinds of panels in the future if he spoke out against WLS. I'm
not a mind-reader, though. Karl Auerbach was a speaker too, though, and
I doubt he's pro-WLS.

SnapNames is a privately held company, too, so it's unclear if they
have private deals with some of the folks who are parroting their
position on WLS, either for equity, stock options, or other forms of
consideration.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 22:51:20 +0200
From: Alexander Svensson <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Mouhamet Diop to the ICANN Board

According to a message on the AfrICANN list,
the ASO has just chosen Mouhamet Diop as ASO 
member on the ICANN Board.
http://www.aso.icann.org/board/2002elections/nominees/diop/index.html

If this is correct, the incumbent, Rob Blokzijl,
has not been re-elected.

Best regards,
/// Alexander	

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 17:34:30 -0400
From: "L. Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] NSI: "any domain name could be unilaterally cancelled"

What I think is interesting is the use by Verisign of the argument in this 
case that they can cancel a domain at will.  Verisign allowed a third 
party to transfer the domain, which is an error on their part that they 
could have remedied by transferring it back to the proper holder.  
Whether it is property or not, IMO, is not the issue here.  Fraud is - on 
the part of the third party.  If a bank is shown by a depositor that 
someone has forged a signature and cashed checks, the bank is 
responsible for returning the money to the depositor and going after the 
forger.  Why should it be different for a registrar or registry?  The error 
was made by Verisign and Verisign should have returned the 
registration to the original holder once it was shown to be a forged 
transfer.

That's my opinion.  It should not have had to go to court at all.

Leah

On 16 Jul 2002, at 13:29, George Kirikos wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> For those following the SEX.com case:
> 
> http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020716/fltu015_1.html
> 
> "Network Solutions repeatedly asserted in the District Court and in
> other courts that domain names are not property and any domain name
> could be unilaterally cancelled by Network Solutions at their will."
> 
> Is that Network Solutions the registrar, or the registry??!!??
> 
> And I thought the Divine Right of Kings philosophy ended a few
> centuries ago....
> 
> Ironically, Gary Kremen keeps the domain SEX.com registered at NSI,
> instead of transferring to another registrar who might be "safer", i.e. has
> Registrar lock, etc.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
> http://autos.yahoo.com
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 
> 

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 18:22:45 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] DNSO/GNSO Board directors

Dear Vint,

I am trying to understand some of the nuances in the Blueprint for Reform 
which still leave me somewhat puzzled...

Will the DNSO simply be re-named as the GNSO thereby allowing Amadeu Abril i 
Abril and Jon Cohen to remain seated as directors (understanding that 
Alejandro's term is set to expire in short order)?  Or does Alejandro have 
the right to stand for re-election within the re-named body perhaps causing 
either Amadeu or Jon to lose their seat??  Or will the GNSO be an entirely 
new organization that will require new elections for two directors (which 
need not necessarily be either Alejandro, Jon or Amadeu)???

How will this play out?

Best regards,
Danny
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 18:35:49 -0400
From: vint cerf <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: DNSO/GNSO Board directors

Danny,

I don't think this has been worked out yet. On the surface one would
imagine a transition period when some directors stay, some depart
and the new organization, GNSO, begins to make its nominations according
to whatever transition schedule is worked out. 

Let me consult with the reform committee to see whether they have yet
come to grips with this level of specificity.

Vint

At 06:22 PM 7/16/2002 -0400, [email-masked] wrote:
>Dear Vint,
>
>I am trying to understand some of the nuances in the Blueprint for Reform 
>which still leave me somewhat puzzled...
>
>Will the DNSO simply be re-named as the GNSO thereby allowing Amadeu Abril i 
>Abril and Jon Cohen to remain seated as directors (understanding that 
>Alejandro's term is set to expire in short order)?  Or does Alejandro have 
>the right to stand for re-election within the re-named body perhaps causing 
>either Amadeu or Jon to lose their seat??  Or will the GNSO be an entirely 
>new organization that will require new elections for two directors (which 
>need not necessarily be either Alejandro, Jon or Amadeu)???
>
>How will this play out?
>
>Best regards,
>Danny 

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 18:22:15 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: DNSO/GNSO Board directors

At 6:35 PM -0400 7/16/02, vint cerf wrote:
>On the surface one would
>imagine a transition period when some directors stay, some depart

Well, fancy that!

Amadeu will stay - he's been a good wee poodle.

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 19:44:42 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] NSI: "any domain name could be unilaterally cancelled"

Tuesday, July 16, 2002, 1:49:57 PM, John Palmer wrote:

> I know I've said it 1,000 times, but:

> NONE OF YOU HAVE TO USE THE USG/ICANN ROOTS.

> If you don't like what they are doing, we can all together vote with
> our feet. 

> There are others out there. 

Keep dreaming, and keep spamming, John.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --
Save Internet Radio!  
CARP will kill Webcasting!
http://www.saveinternetradio.org/

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 23:23:38 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] DC events: Cato on ICANN (7/23) and CEI on copyright (7/22) - Spcl. Attn. Izumi Aizu

All assembly members, stakeholders/users, or other interested parties,

  Looks like Congress is still very interested in ICANN!

FYI:  From Polytech:

=================  Copy as follows ==========
Subject: FC: DC events: Cato on ICANN (7/23) and CEI on copyright (7/22)

   Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 23:38:50 -0400
   From:  Declan McCullagh <[email-masked]>
     To:  [email-masked]

Subject: ICANN book forum (7/23, 11:00 at Cato)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 10:43:08 -0400
From: "Adam Thierer" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>

Declan... Politech readers may be interested in this Cato Institute
ICANN
debate next Tuesday at 11:00. As always, it's free and open to the
public.
Thanks, - - Adam T.

________________________

"Who Rules the Root? ICANN, Domain Names, and the Battle over Internet
Governance"

Cato Institute BOOK FORUM
Tuesday, July 23, 2002
11:00 a.m. (Luncheon to follow)
The Cato Institute / 1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW

Featuring:
Milton Mueller, Author, Ruling the Root: Internet Governance and the
Taming
of Cyberspace (MIT Press, 2002)

with comments by:

Ira C. Magaziner (invited), SJS Advisors
Michael M. Roberts, The Darwin Group
Harold Feld, Media Access Project.

        Critics of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
Numbers (ICANN)
claim that it's an unaccountable global regulatory regime that is using
its
control of the domain name "root" to regulate the Internet. ICANN
supporters respond by noting that the young organization is striving to
achieve international consensus on a complicated set of issues and that
no
better system currently exists. In his new book, Syracuse University
professor Milton Mueller argues that sweeping changes and a fresh start
are
needed. ICANN experts will be on hand to provide additional perspectives

and comment on Mueller's conclusions.

*** Cato book forums and luncheons are open to the public and free of
charge. To register for this event, please fill out the form below and
click submit or call Julie Cullifer by 11:00 a.m., Monday, July 22,
2002,
at (202) 789-5229, fax her at (202) 371-0841, or e-mail to
[email-masked]. If you can't make it to the Cato Institute, watch
this
forum live online.

______________________________
Adam D. Thierer
Director of Telecommunications Studies
Cato Institute
1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC  20001
202-789-5211
(f) 202-842-3490
[email-masked]
Cato Tech Info: www.cato.org/tech/index.html
Cato Home Page: www.cato.org

- ---

Subject: Invitation to Forum on Intellectual Property
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 12:05:02 -0400
From: "James V. Delong" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: "Maura McGonigle" <[email-masked]>

Declan --
Could you pass this on to Politech readers, who might, I would imagine,
be
interested?
Thanks.
Jim

James V. DeLong
Senior Fellow - Project on Technology & Innovation
Competitive Enterprise Institute
1001 Connecticut Ave., NW - Suite 1250
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 331-1010 TEL       (202) 331-0640 FAX
[email-masked]        http://www.cei.org/sections/section38.cfm

COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE                 INSTITUTE FOR POLICY
INNOVATION

Invasion of the Idea Snatchers:  Defending Technological and Artistic
Innovation

A Forum on Intellectual Property Rights

When:           Monday, July 22, 2002, 8:00 am 2:00 pm

Where:          Senate Caucus Room

Rm. 325 Russell Senate Office Building

Much current public policy debate is swirling around issues of
intellectual
property.  Whether it s downloading music, movies, software or other
copyrighted material with Napster, Kazaa or Gnutella; legislative
attempts
to control drug costs through weakening pharmaceutical patents; or AIDS
activists demanding free prescription drugs, intellectual property is
under
attack politically and economically, at home and abroad.

The U.S. currently produces 43 percent of the world s creative
output.  What will happen if Congress or other countries significantly
undermine the intellectual property protections that give our artists,
actors, writers, scientists and researchers the incentive to create?
Does
intellectual property protection stifle competition and increase
prices?  Or does it encourage competition, expand knowledge and
strengthen
the economy?

The Competitive Enterprise Institute and the Institute for Policy
Innovation are assembling experts from the creative industries to
address
these questions.  Representatives from the software, hardware,
pharmaceutical and entertainment industries will discuss the role and
importance of intellectual property.  Others will explain what is
happening
internationally, and prospects for the future.

Many of the upcoming legislative and judicial battles will revolve
around
these issues.  To understand them better, attend this forum.

Speakers/Panelists include:

Richard A. Epstein, University of Chicago Law School, James Parker Hall
Professor, Distinguished Service Professor of Law

Susan O. Mann, Microsoft, Federal Government Affairs Manager

Robert A. Armitage, Eli Lilly & Co., Vice-President and General Patent
Counsel, Lilly Research Laboratories.

Fritz Attaway, Motion Picture Association of America, General Counsel

Jeffrey Lawrence, Intel, Lead Attorney for Intel s Content Protection
Program

Michael K. Kirk, American Intellectual Property Law Association,
Executive
Director

Jonathan Zuck, Association for Competitive Technology, Executive
Director

Tentative:  Q. Todd Dickinson, former Director of U.S. Patent and
Trademark
Office; Partner & Co-Chair of Howrey Simon Arnold & White s Intellectual

Property Practice

**For a more details, visit our website at www.cei.org.  This event is
free
of charge but reservations are necessary.  For more information or to
RSVP
please contact Maura McGonigle at (202) 331-1010 or [email-masked]

Agenda:

8:00 am 9:00 am               Registration/Continental Breakfast

9:00 am 9:10 am                Welcome

9:10 am 9:30 am                Overview of Intellectual Property World

tentatively,
Q. Todd Dickinson

9:30 am 10:30 am              Industry Panel

                                                             Software:
Susan O. Mann, Microsoft

Entertainment:
Fritz Attaway, MPAA

                                                             Hardware:
Jeffrey Lawrence, Intel

Pharmaceutical:
Robert A. Armitage, Eli Lilly

10:30 am 10:45 am            Break

10:45 am 11:45 am            Q&A with Industry Panel

                                                             Moderators
James V. DeLong, CEI, and Dr. Merrill

Matthews, IPI, pose hardball questions to panelists

Audience questions

11:45 am 12:30 pm            International Dimensions of Intellectual
Property

                                                             Michael K.
Kirk, AIPLA

                                                             Jonathan
Zuck,
Assoc. for Competitive Technology

12:30 am 1:45 am              Lunch/Lunch Speaker

                                                             Richard A.
Epstein, Professor of Law, University of

Chicago Law School

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html

This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 00:40:28 -0500
From: Bret Fausett <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Why Bret Fausett likes WLS?

You people should get a life. I shouldn't even respond to this, but since 
my name was picked for the subject line, here goes: I paid my own airfare, 
my own hotel, and the time I spent at the Fulcrum Conference went in to the 
great non-billable blackhole, as so much of my ICANN time does. As a 
speaker, I did get to attend a very nice two-day conference for free, 
though I ducked out for a couple of hours at one point to do the webcast 
for a names council meeting. A fellow from .tv bought me and some other 
folks dinner one night, and Ellen Rony drove me to the Muni station after 
the conference was over so I could catch the train back to the airport. To 
the best of my recollection, that's the full list of my indebtedness for 
those two days last year.

If I had devoted the time I've spent on ICANN over the last few years to 
virtually any other endeavor -- hell, even a paper route -- I'd have fared 
better financially. The idea that Snapnames might be giving people stock 
options for supporting the WLS on the General Assembly mailing list is 
beyond absurd. It's just as absurd as the notion that every opponent of the 
WLS is someone who traffics in a volume of domain names and profits from 
their resale. That's absurd too, right?

              -- Bret

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 23:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Why Bret Fausett likes WLS?

Hello,

- --- Bret Fausett <[email-masked]> wrote:
> better financially. The idea that Snapnames might be giving people
> stock 
> options for supporting the WLS on the General Assembly mailing list
> is 
> beyond absurd. It's just as absurd as the notion that every opponent
> of the 
> WLS is someone who traffics in a volume of domain names and profits
> from 
> their resale. That's absurd too, right?

If you go back and read the thread, I wasn't the one that brought up
the conference you attended -- someone else did. Indeed, I defended you
by pointing out:

1) I thought it not important, as I knew of it long ago and didn't
think it worth posting when I discovered it
2) presented the example of Karl Auerbach, another presenter, where the
conclusion couldn't be drawn

The musing about stock options didn't specify the GA list -- that's
something you added. Given the registrar split in support, though, and
the fact that some supporters are on their board of directors/advisors
and have participated in the debate, the old idea of "follow the money"
applies. Although, one can't really follow it very precisely, except
muse that that might be a good strategy to obtain support.

If one of the dissenting registrars had hired Becky Burr or other
lawyers/lobbyists instead of SnapNames, I'm sure they'd be advocating
the exact opposite to what they're advocating at present, as that's
what they're paid to do.

I can't speak for the 2400+ signatories of the anti-WLS petition, but
logic dictates they can't all be high volume registrants, since there
might only be 20 or so big "players" in the industry (and I'm not one
of them, but I know who many of them are, as they beat me to the best
domains 99.9% of the time).

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 11:13:54 +0200
From: "DNSO Secretariat" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Public comment period on WHOIS final report till 14 August

[ To: [email-masked], [email-masked] ]
[ To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]]
[ To: [email-masked]]

http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/whoisTF/

ICANN/DNSO

   Call for comments on final report of WHOIS Task Force
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

17 July  2002
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/2001calendardnso.html
2001/06/11 DNSO Names Council Whois Survey. The ICANN Domain Names
Supporting Organization (DNSO) is conducting a study of the Internet
domain-name system's Whois system, which provides information about
registrations of domain names. The DNSO invites you to participate by
filling out a survey posted on the ICANN website. The comment period is open
NOW until 31 July 2001.

On 26 June 2002, the WHOIS Task Force submitted its final report to
the Names Council at the Bucharest meeting
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20020626.NCbucharest-WhoisTF-final.ppt
The full report can be found at:
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/whoisTF/

The Task Force Final Report is open for 4 weeks for public comments,
starting today 17 July 2002, ending 14 August  2002.

All comments should be sent to
[email-masked]

no later than 14 August 2002.

The archives for comments on the Transfer TF Report on the WLS proposal
are on line at:

   * http://www.dnso.org/dnso/dnsocomments/comments-whois/Arc00/

The full archives of the WHOIS Task Force are on line at:

   * http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-whois/Arc00/
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Information from: © DNSO Secretariat

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

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1333
*************************