Two small points...
RFC 1591 designates .org as a catch-all, not "non-profit corporations" and
two there is a huge difference between "non-profit corporations" and
"non-profit organizations". As somebody else pointed out on this subject
today, Postel should have used "non-commercial" as the expanded label for
clarity's sake....
>
> > Hello bill,
> >
> > Thursday, March 01, 2001, 10:18:06 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > 2) ICANN wants to restrict .org to non-profits only "a
> restriction that
> > > hasn't been enforced in recent years" -- actually .org was for *all*
> > > organizations that were not either .commercial or .network
> infrastructure,
> > > for example we registered our family domain in .org my family is not
> > > commercial nor are we network infrastructure but were not non-profit
> > > either! If they enforce "non-profit" only, i.e. you need to have
> > > non-profit tax status, there goes our family domain.
> >
> > This portion needs to be stopped.
>
> Firstly, I seriously doubt they'd be able to do this with *existing*
> domain names, secondly, we still don't know exactly what they mean by
> "non-profit", just yet. Certainly not all countries have the same
> definition...in any case the RFC for .org never mentioned profit status,
> just that it was the appropriate TLD for something that didn't fit into
> .com or .net
>
> Personally, I thought they would have enforced the RFC's for .net first,
> since it actually spelled out what .net should and shouldn't be used for
> much more concisely than .org
>
