Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1472
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Tuesday, October 15 2002          Volume 01 : Number 1472

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

Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 11:28:18 -0400
From: "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz

> >> "   ORG - This domain is intended as the miscellaneous TLD for
> >>          organizations that didn't fit anywhere else.  Some non-
> >>          government organizations may fit here.

> Sorry, that is irrelevant, and worse, misleading.  It says "...that
> didn't fit anywhere else", and .com is specifically for commercial
> entities.  Since all commercial entities "fit" in .com, it follows that
> .org is for entities that are non-commercial.

Not at all.  If a commercial entity is called <NAME> and <NAME>.com is
already taken, then that commercial entity will not "fit" in .com as
<NAME>.com.  If the .org version of the name is not taken, then that
commercial entity will "fit" in .org as <NAME>.org.  I imagine that one's
point of view is determined by how one reads the word "fit".

- --
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 17:47:51 +0200
From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Deletes TF

There have been four excellent candidates to represent the GA on the 
deletes task force: John Berryhill, Dan Steinberg, Alexander  
Svensson (who subsequently announced that he'd prefer one of the  
other candidates to take the seat), and Abel Wisman.

By fiat of a three-edged coin, I've asked John Berryhill to  
represent the GA on the deletes task force.

- -- 
Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.INFO/
- --
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 09:52:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Deletes TF

Hello,

- --- Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]> wrote:
> By fiat of a three-edged coin, I've asked John Berryhill to  
> represent the GA on the deletes task force.

Great choice! :) Although, hopefully the Task Force recommendations are
not ignored by ICANN's Board, as in the case of WLS.

Does ICANN have any time limit to respond to Dotster's appeal? It's
already been more than a month:

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/brannon-letter-to-lynn-09sep02.htm

Certainly it shouldn't take that long for Verisign's lawyers to write
the letter for ICANN....

Sincerely,

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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:52:04 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Elisabeth Porteneuve <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Fwd: Dot Org to ISOC/PIR, ICANN Meeing on 14-15 Dec 2002 in Europe

cf. http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-14oct02.htm

2002 Annual Meeting

Resolved [02.108] that the ICANN annual meeting for 2002 
will be held on 14 December (Public Forum) and 15 December 
(Board Meeting) 2002 in Europe, at a location to be selected 
by the President.

> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 09:44:33 -0700
> From: Louis Touton <[email-masked]>
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [council] ICANN Board Selects ISOC Proposal for .org Successor Operator
> 
> To the Names Council:
> 
> Today the ICANN Board selected Public Interest Registry (PIR), a
> not-for-profit organization established by the Internet Society, to
> enter into contract negotiations with ICANN to become the successor
> operator for .org.  The annoucement is posted at
> <http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-14oct02.htm>; the
> preliminary report of the Board meeting is posted at
> <http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-14oct02.htm>.
> 
> ICANN thanks the applicants for their committment in the long and
> arduous evaluation process, which resulted in many excellent proposals.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Louis Touton
> 
> 
- --
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 11:16:23 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz

On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 11:28:18AM -0400, John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. wrote:
> > >> "   ORG - This domain is intended as the miscellaneous TLD for
> > >>          organizations that didn't fit anywhere else.  Some non-
> > >>          government organizations may fit here.
> 
> > Sorry, that is irrelevant, and worse, misleading.  It says "...that
> > didn't fit anywhere else", and .com is specifically for commercial
> > entities.  Since all commercial entities "fit" in .com, it follows that
> > .org is for entities that are non-commercial.
> 
> Not at all.  If a commercial entity is called <NAME> and <NAME>.com is
> already taken, then that commercial entity will not "fit" in .com as
> <NAME>.com.  If the .org version of the name is not taken, then that
> commercial entity will "fit" in .org as <NAME>.org.  I imagine that one's
> point of view is determined by how one reads the word "fit".

Yes -- one can read it like a sophist.  So what?

The text was about criteria for *registrants*, not *names*, and said
"organizations that didn't fit" -- ie, didn't meet the criteria.  It was
not about "names that didn't fit".  You (and Froomkin) can mince words
all day, but the meaning is quite clear, and you know it.

- --
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 20:11:58 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Elisabeth Porteneuve <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] RESOLUTION  102  (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002)

<><><>
RESOLUTION  102  (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002)
Management of Internet domain names and addresses

The Plenipotentiary Conference of the International Telecommunication
Union ( Marrakesh, 2002),

aware

that the purposes of the Union are, inter alia, to promote, at the
international level, the adoption of a broad approach to the issues of
telecommunications in the global information economy and society, to
promote the extension of the benefits of new telecommunication
technologies to all the world's inhabitants and to harmonize the efforts
of Member States and Sector Members in the attainment of those ends,

considering

  a) that advances in the global information infrastructure, including the
     development of Internet Protocol (IP) based networks and especially the
     Internet, are of crucial importance as an important engine for growth in
     the world economy in the twenty first century;
  b) that the private sector is playing a very important role in the
     expansion and development of the Internet, for example through
     investments in infrastructures and services;
  c) that the development of the Internet is essentially market led and
     driven by private and government initiatives;
  d) that the management of the registration and allocation of Internet
     domain names and addresses must fully reflect the geographical and
     functional nature of the Internet, taking into account an equitable
     balance of interests of all stakeholders;
  e) that Internet domain names and addresses, and more generally the
     Internet and global information networks, must be widely accessible to
     all citizens without regard to gender, race, religion or country of
     residence;
  f) that the methods of allocation of Internet domain names and addresses
     should not privilege any country or region of the world to the detriment
     of others;
  g) that the management of the Internet is a subject of valid
     international interest and must flow from full international
     cooperation;
  h) that the expanding use of the Internet is expected to lead to the
     need for an increased capacity of IP addresses;
  i) that Member States represent the interests of the population of the
     country or territory for which a country code top-level domain (ccTLD)
     has been delegated;
  j) that Member States should play an active role in coordinating the
     resolution of management and administrative constraints arising with
     respect to their ccTLDs,

recognizing

  a) that ITU is dealing with issues related to IP'based networks in
     general and the Internet in particular;
  b) that ITU performs worldwide coordination of a number of name and
     address allocation systems and acts as a forum for policy discussion in
     this area;
  c) that ITU can play a positive role by offering a platform for
     encouraging discussions, and for the dissemination of information,
     particularly to developing country governments, on the management of
     Internet domain names and addresses;
  d) that through international cooperation, ITU should contribute to
     policy development related to the management of Internet domain names
    and addresses,

emphasizing

  a) that the management of Internet domain names and addresses includes:
     * technical and coordination tasks, for which technical private bodies
       can be responsible, and;
     * public interest matters (for example, stability, security, freedom of
       use, protection of individual rights, sovereignty, competition rules and
       equal access for all), for which governments or intergovernmental
       organizations are responsible and to which qualified international
       organizations contribute;
  b) that the methods of allocation of global and essential resources such
     as Internet domain names and addresses are of interest to both
     governments and the private sector;
  c) that the role of governments is to provide a clear, consistent and
     predictable legal framework, to promote a favourable environment in
     which global information networks are interoperable and widely
     accessible to all citizens, and to ensure adequate protection of public
     interests in the management of Internet domain names and addresses;
  d) that it is in the public interest that the system that manages
     Internet domain names and addresses has transparent rules and
     procedures, including dispute resolution procedures to facilitate the
     protection of intellectual property rights;
  e) that governments are expected to promote, as appropriate, a fair
     competitive environment among companies or organizations responsible for
     Internet resource allocation,

instructs the Secretary General

   1 to take a significant role in international discussions and
     initiatives on the management of Internet domain names and addresses,
     taking into account associated developments and the purposes of the
     Union;
   2 to encourage all Member States to participate in the discussions on
     international management of Internet domain names and addresses, so that
     worldwide representation in the debates can be ensured;
   3 to liaise and to cooperate, in conjunction with the Bureaux, with the
     regional telecommunication organizations pursuant to this resolution;
   4 to provide assistance, in conjunction with the Bureaux, to Member
     States, if so requested, in order to achieve their stated policy
     objectives with respect to the management of Internet domain names and
     addresses;
   5 to report annually to the Council on the activities undertaken on this
     subject,

instructs the Director of the Telecommunication Standardization Bureau

   1 to continue to liaise and to cooperate with appropriate entities on
     relevant Internet domain name and address management issues, such as the
     transition to IP Version 6 (IPv6), ENUM, and internationalized domain
     names (IDN);
   2 to work with Member States and Sector Members, recognizing the
     activities of other appropriate entities, to review Member States' ccTLD
     and other related experiences;
   3 to work with Member States and Sector Members, recognizing the
     activities of other appropriate entities, to develop a recommendation to
     clarify the management of the domain ".int";
   4 to report annually to the Council on the activities undertaken on this
     subject,

instructs the Director of the Telecommunication Development Bureau

   1 to organize international and regional forums, in conjunction with
     appropriate entities, for the period 2002-2006, to discuss policy,
     operational and technical issues on the Internet in general and the
     management of Internet domain names and addresses in particular for the
     benefit of Member States, especially for least developed countries;
   2 to report annually to the Council on the activities undertaken on this
     subject,

instructs the Council

     to take appropriate measures in order to contribute actively to
     international discussions and initiatives related to the management of
     Internet domain names and addresses,

invites Member States

   1 to participate actively in the discussions on the management of
     Internet domain names and addresses and notably on progress being made
     in pursuit of their policy objectives;
   2 to participate in and follow the policy, operational and technical
     developments of the management of Internet domain names and addresses;
   3 to increase awareness at national level among all appropriate
     entities, and to encourage their participation in the management of
     Internet domain names and addresses.

- --
(curtesy of Paul Kane)
- --
- --
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 14:25:00 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Deletes TF - Due process?

Thomas and all assembly members,

  I think John would make a good member of this beleaguered task
force, should he except.  My question and concern is how
and under what precepts was John selected?  Are not the
Task Force members/replacements determined by election.

Thomas Roessler wrote:

> There have been four excellent candidates to represent the GA on the
> deletes task force: John Berryhill, Dan Steinberg, Alexander
> Svensson (who subsequently announced that he'd prefer one of the
> other candidates to take the seat), and Abel Wisman.
>
> By fiat of a three-edged coin, I've asked John Berryhill to
> represent the GA on the deletes task force.
>
> --
> Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.INFO/
> --
> 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

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k 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: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 14:57:33 -0500
From: "John Palmer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Looks like .ORG goes to ISOC

http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-14oct02.htm
- --
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 22:24:21 +0200
From: "DNSO Secretariat" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] DNSO NC Shanghai meeting agenda, October 29, 2002

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

[ http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20021029.NCShanghai-meeting-agenda.html ]

ICANN/DNSO

   DNSO Names Council Shanghai, China Meeting on October 29 2002 - Agenda

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

14 October 2002.

Coordinated Universal Time UTC 06:00 - see below for local times

Bruce Tonkin will be chairing the Names Council meeting

Scheduled time for meeting - 180 mins.

PROPOSED NAMES COUNCIL AGENDA Tuesday , October 29, 2002

This agenda was established according to the Rules of Procedure for the DNSO
Names Council
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010711.NCprocedures-v4.0.html

  1. Approval of agenda

  2. Summary of last meetings

     http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20020926.NCteleconf-minutes.html
     http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20021003.NCteleconf-minutes.html

  3. Issues arising from the teleconference of 3 October 2002

     3.1. Ratify email vote on 4 Resolutions - [10 mins]
     http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20021001.NC-resolutions-vote.html

     3.2 Vote on change of Names Council Procedures for appointing task
     force chairs [15 mins] Resolution proposed by Jordyn Buchanan and
     seconded by Ellen Shankman

       1. Whereas, the Names Council Rules of Procedure for the DNSO
          Council, Version 7, currently provides that:
          http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20020418.NCprocedures-v7.0.html

          "The chair of an interim committee, committee or task force is
          appointed by the NC. In the case of a task force the NC typically
          chooses to ratify the election of a chair by the task force
          itself. The chair must be an NC member."

       2. Whereas, the Names Council seeks to encourage diversity of
          participation from each of its constituencies as well as the
          General Assembly on Task Forces;

       3. Whereas, the Names Council recognizes that due to time, resources,
          and specialized fields of expertise, the most appropriate people
          to serve on such Task Forces may not include members who serve on
          the Names Council;

       4. Whereas, the Names Council recognizes the amount of time and work
          that must be performed by the Chair of the Task Force and that
          such time and work may not be able to be performed by an existing
          Names Council member;

       5. Whereas, the Names Council also recognizes that it must maintain
          short lines of communication with any TF and also maintain control
          over policy issues:

          Therefore, be it resolved that:

          a) Section 3.2 of the Names Council Rules of Procedure for the
          DNSO Council, Version 7, be amended to state: "3.2 (a) Chair: The
          chair of an interim committee, committee or task force is
          appointed by the NC. In the case of a task force the NC typically
          chooses to ratify the election of a chair by the task force
          itself. The chair need not be an NC member;

          b) A new Section 3.2(b) is inserted to state: "3.2(b) Liaison: The
          NC may appoint one or more liaisons to any TF for the purpose of
          ensuring that the TF is complying with the TF Terms of Reference
          (or issues statement as it may be referred to) and to report back
          to the NC the progress made of the TF.

  4. Deletes task force [for decision - 30 minutes] Policy Process initiated
     on 3 Oct 2002
     http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20020919.NCdeletes-issues.html

     Terms of reference
       1. determine whether a uniform delete process by gtld registrars
          following expiry is desirable, and if so, recommend an appropriate
          process
       2. determine whether a uniform delete process by gtld registrars
          following a failure of a registrant to provide accurate WHOIS
          information upon request is desirable, and if so, recommend an
          appropriate process
       3. determine whether a uniform delete and re-allocation process by
          gtld registries following receipt of a delete command from a
          registrar is desirable, and if so, recommend an appropriate
          process
       4. determine whether a uniform process for reversing errors in
          renewal commands without requiring a delete operation is
          desirable, and if so, recommend an appropriate process

     Process
       1. task force members from each constituency due 17 Oct 2002 (10 days
          after 7 Oct 02)
       2. open public comments on the topic for 20 days beginning 14 Oct
          2002
       3. constituency position statements due 8 Nov 2002 (35 days after 3
          Oct 02)
       4. Preliminary Task Force Report due 15 Nov 2002 - Task Force Report
          due 25 Nov 2002
       5. Public comment period from 25 Nov 2002 until 16 Dec 2002 (20 days)
       6. Final Task Force Report due 26 Dec 2002 - Council to review report
          at meeting around 5 Jan 2003
       7. Board Report due around 10 Jan 2003

     Current Task Force Membership
        o Jordyn Buchanan (Registry constituency rep, and initial chair)
        o Adam Peake (Non-commercial org constituency rep)
        o Bret Fausett (Business constituency rep)
        o as of 14 Oct still waiting for ccTLDs, Intellectual Property,
          Registrars, ISPs to nominate)
        o up to 3 additional reps (recommend one from the individual
          registrant /GA community)

     Resolution for the Names Council to approve the terms of reference and
     initial membership.

  5. Transfers Task Force [for discussion - 30 mins]
     - review task force report and recommendations

  6. WHOIS Task Force [for discussion - 30 mins]
     - review task force report and recommendations

  7. Agenda topics for next meeting 14 Nov 2002
       a. Transfers Recommendations (for decision)
       b. WHOIS recommendations (for decision)
       c. UDRP recommendations (for discussion)
       d. IDN update (as necessary)
       e. budget report (for discussion)
       f. Discussion on Dept of Commerce MOU (proposed by Harold Feld in 26
          Sept teleconference, waiting for issues paper or proposed
          resolution)
       g. Discussion on role of Governments (proposed by Marilyn Cade in 26
          Sept teleconference, waiting for issues paper or proposed
          resolution)

  8. Any other business

Date, time

     The Names Council Shanghai, China meeting will be held on 29 October
     2002 at 14:00 local time: For other times please see below:

     (22.00 Monday 28 Oct LA, 01:00 New York, 14:00 Shanghai, 07:00 Paris,
     15:00 Japan/Korea, 17:00 Melbourne)

     ------------------------------------------------------------
     Local time between end October and end March, WINTER in the NORTHERN
hemisphere
     ------------------------------------------------------------
     Reference (Coordinated Universal Time)     UTC         06:00
     ------------------------------------------------------------
     California, USA                            UTC-8+0DST  22:00 (day
before)
     Monterrey, Mexico                          UTC-6+0DST  00:00
     Washington DC, USA                   (EST) UTC-5+0DST  01:00
     Lima, Peru                                 UTC-5+0DST  01:00
     Buenos Aires, Argentina                    UTC-3+0DST  03:00
     London, United Kingdom                     UTC+0+0DST  06:00
     Brussels, Belgium                    (CET) UTC+1+0DST  07:00
     Barcelona, Spain                     (CET) UTC+1+0DST  07:00
     Berlin, Germany                      (CET) UTC+1+0DST  07:00
     Paris, France                        (CET) UTC+1+0DST  07:00
     Jerusalem, Israel                          UTC+2+0DST  08:00
     Shanghai, China                            UTC+8+0DST  14:00
     Seoul, Korea                               UTC+9+0DST  15:00
     Tokyo,Japan                                UTC+9+0DST  15:00
     Melbourne, Australia                       UTC+10+1DST 17:00
     Auckland, New Zealand                      UTC+12+1DST 19:00
     ------------------------------------------------------------
     The DST ends/starts on last Sunday of March (with some exceptions)
     ------------------------------------------------------------
     For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/

     The full participants are the 21 NC members as listed in
     http://www.dnso.org/constituency/ncmembers.html DNSO Secretariat, ICANN
     Officers: Louis Touton, Theresa Swinehart

Next Names Council teleconference will be held on Thursday 14 November 2002,
at 15:00 CET, 14:00 UTC see information http://www.dnso.org/meetings.html

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

                 Information from:  © DNSO Names Council

- --
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 17:17:14 -0700
From: Bret Fausett <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] RESOLUTION  102  (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002)

Thank you for forwarding this, Elisabeth.

Now can someone help with the context? Why should we care about this? At
bottom, the resolution appears to say only that the ITU and its member
states should continue to participate in the management of the DNS and IP
address administration. If I were more adept at reading government-speak,
I'm sure I'd see the deeper meaning, but on its face, I don't read this as a
change over the status quo. Did I miss something?

        -- Bret

Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:
> RESOLUTION  102  (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002)
> Management of Internet domain names and addresses

- --
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 16:02:33 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz

At 11:16 AM -0700 10/14/02, [email-masked] wrote:

>The text was about criteria for *registrants*, not *names*, and said
>"organizations that didn't fit" -- ie, didn't meet the criteria.  It was
>not about "names that didn't fit".  You (and Froomkin) can mince words
>all day, but the meaning is quite clear, and you know it.

Well, if the meaning was so "clear", why can we find entities other than
"non profit organisations" using .org?

History shows that your interpretation of these words differs greatly from
the real deal.

But you're being paid by ICANN to do what you do (even officially these
days), so there's no puzzle as to why you take the road you're on. It just
gets a bit old sometimes.

- -- 
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 17:52:09 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz

The cross over of reality to paper and vice versa is very hard for some.
Perhaps If they were not on payrolls and instead had to actually earn a living
they would understand.
Or perhaps if they had to pay the programmers salary they may have a fresher
concept of reality.
Or maybe if the were not schooled by Enron and Worldcom executives they would
get it.
It is always someone else's rights or other peoples money.
Eric

Andy Gardner wrote:

> At 11:16 AM -0700 10/14/02, [email-masked] wrote:
>
> >The text was about criteria for *registrants*, not *names*, and said
> >"organizations that didn't fit" -- ie, didn't meet the criteria.  It was
> >not about "names that didn't fit".  You (and Froomkin) can mince words
> >all day, but the meaning is quite clear, and you know it.
>
> Well, if the meaning was so "clear", why can we find entities other than
> "non profit organisations" using .org?
>
> History shows that your interpretation of these words differs greatly from
> the real deal.
>
> But you're being paid by ICANN to do what you do (even officially these
> days), so there's no puzzle as to why you take the road you're on. It just
> gets a bit old sometimes.
>
> --
> 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

- --
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:22:23 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz/ Private

I do not make private messages public.  I love free speech and hate
censorship.
But I have a problem here.
I am quite convinced that one should not yell fire in a theatre out of
context, and one should not publish child pornography.  But can some of
you help me hack this prick into oblivion.  I lost a cousin in 911 and
just lost an associate in Bali, I am not laughing.

Does this have to do with domain names?  Taliban.com, You decide.

My blessing to all my fellow true members of clergy and lay work on
behalf of rightful caring.  May we withstand threats that are direct or
indirect and carry on correctly with our missions.  This is not Muslim
behavior or the word of Islam but a direct challenge to those of us who
care.  I will not bow to this implicit threat.

Lord help us,
eric

The Mullah wrote:

> > I think you are not a Mullah!  but prove me wrong.
>
> Are you joking?
>
> I am the Mullah of Taliban.com.
>
> Regards,
>
> The Mullah
> [email-masked]

- --
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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 19:45:41 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz/ Private

No asshole, the point is whether or not you should be doing what your
doing.
You are a sick son of a bitch  If you are Taliban you are really sick
and if you
are not you may be sicker.
You prove no point except your own sickness.
How many relatives or friends have you lost to the Taliban?
I will throw you down and turn your money changing tables over.  You
ruin my
internet by your sickness and make it unsafe for our children. How do
feel that my 14 year old read your message and now is crying. Damn you!
Causing fear through verbal, written or actual terrorism is sick and
disgusting
and you should rot.

Eric Dierker

The Mullah wrote:

> Threat of what?
>
> Eric, go read the whois for taliban.com and get a grip on reality.  The
> point is about whether "official" organizations should or shouldn't have the
> corresponding domain name.
>
> There are some which, for obvious reasons, shouldn't.  And that is worth
> remembering in the context of whether it should be official policy for
> "governments" to be entitled to whatever they want on the internet.
>
> Regards,
>
> The Mullah
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
> > [email-masked]
> > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 9:22 PM
> > To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz/ Private
> >
> >
> > I do not make private messages public.  I love free speech and hate
> > censorship.
> > But I have a problem here.
> > I am quite convinced that one should not yell fire in a theatre out of
> > context, and one should not publish child pornography.  But can some of
> > you help me hack this prick into oblivion.  I lost a cousin in 911 and
> > just lost an associate in Bali, I am not laughing.
> >
> > Does this have to do with domain names?  Taliban.com, You decide.
> >
> > My blessing to all my fellow true members of clergy and lay work on
> > behalf of rightful caring.  May we withstand threats that are direct or
> > indirect and carry on correctly with our missions.  This is not Muslim
> > behavior or the word of Islam but a direct challenge to those of us who
> > care.  I will not bow to this implicit threat.
> >
> > Lord help us,
> > eric
> >
> > The Mullah wrote:
> >
> > > > I think you are not a Mullah!  but prove me wrong.
> > >
> > > Are you joking?
> > >
> > > I am the Mullah of Taliban.com.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > The Mullah
> > > [email-masked]
> >
> > --
> > 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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 19:56:54 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz/ Private

Oh I think I forgot to mention you dognosed prick.  That you are degrading all
men and women of the cloth if you are not a Muslim trained and educated and
leading in religious ways and that you are blasphemous and disgusting to those
of us who study and train in teaching understanding and the ways of passion.
You are quite ill and need to tracked down like a rabid dog.

Eric

The Mullah wrote:

> Threat of what?
>
> Eric, go read the whois for taliban.com and get a grip on reality.  The
> point is about whether "official" organizations should or shouldn't have the
> corresponding domain name.
>
> There are some which, for obvious reasons, shouldn't.  And that is worth
> remembering in the context of whether it should be official policy for
> "governments" to be entitled to whatever they want on the internet.
>
> Regards,
>
> The Mullah
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
> > [email-masked]
> > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 9:22 PM
> > To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz/ Private
> >
> >
> > I do not make private messages public.  I love free speech and hate
> > censorship.
> > But I have a problem here.
> > I am quite convinced that one should not yell fire in a theatre out of
> > context, and one should not publish child pornography.  But can some of
> > you help me hack this prick into oblivion.  I lost a cousin in 911 and
> > just lost an associate in Bali, I am not laughing.
> >
> > Does this have to do with domain names?  Taliban.com, You decide.
> >
> > My blessing to all my fellow true members of clergy and lay work on
> > behalf of rightful caring.  May we withstand threats that are direct or
> > indirect and carry on correctly with our missions.  This is not Muslim
> > behavior or the word of Islam but a direct challenge to those of us who
> > care.  I will not bow to this implicit threat.
> >
> > Lord help us,
> > eric
> >
> > The Mullah wrote:
> >
> > > > I think you are not a Mullah!  but prove me wrong.
> > >
> > > Are you joking?
> > >
> > > I am the Mullah of Taliban.com.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > The Mullah
> > > [email-masked]
> >
> > --
> > 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: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 22:38:15 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz/ Private

Eric and all assembly members,

  Eric, I think you may need to work on your interpersonal skills
here.  >;)

  That said, yes indeed this unfortunate fellow is obviously attempting
to disrupt and cause trouble.  His emotive language on this forum
are testimony to that.  As to his sincerity I am not sure.  None the
less, the best way of handling this sort of thing is to do you preliminary
investigation on your own, than send that data along with this fellows
comments along to the proper authorities.  And to do this each and
every time you are impacted or concerned about it...

[email-masked] wrote:

> Oh I think I forgot to mention you dognosed prick.  That you are degrading all
> men and women of the cloth if you are not a Muslim trained and educated and
> leading in religious ways and that you are blasphemous and disgusting to those
> of us who study and train in teaching understanding and the ways of passion.
> You are quite ill and need to tracked down like a rabid dog.
>
> Eric
>
> The Mullah wrote:
>
> > Threat of what?
> >
> > Eric, go read the whois for taliban.com and get a grip on reality.  The
> > point is about whether "official" organizations should or shouldn't have the
> > corresponding domain name.
> >
> > There are some which, for obvious reasons, shouldn't.  And that is worth
> > remembering in the context of whether it should be official policy for
> > "governments" to be entitled to whatever they want on the internet.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > The Mullah
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
> > > [email-masked]
> > > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 9:22 PM
> > > To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> > > Subject: Re: [ga] Interesting WIPO ruling re: NewZealand.biz/ Private
> > >
> > >
> > > I do not make private messages public.  I love free speech and hate
> > > censorship.
> > > But I have a problem here.
> > > I am quite convinced that one should not yell fire in a theatre out of
> > > context, and one should not publish child pornography.  But can some of
> > > you help me hack this prick into oblivion.  I lost a cousin in 911 and
> > > just lost an associate in Bali, I am not laughing.
> > >
> > > Does this have to do with domain names?  Taliban.com, You decide.
> > >
> > > My blessing to all my fellow true members of clergy and lay work on
> > > behalf of rightful caring.  May we withstand threats that are direct or
> > > indirect and carry on correctly with our missions.  This is not Muslim
> > > behavior or the word of Islam but a direct challenge to those of us who
> > > care.  I will not bow to this implicit threat.
> > >
> > > Lord help us,
> > > eric
> > >
> > > The Mullah wrote:
> > >
> > > > > I think you are not a Mullah!  but prove me wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Are you joking?
> > > >
> > > > I am the Mullah of Taliban.com.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > The Mullah
> > > > [email-masked]
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k 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: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1472
*************************