Which is the problem. We have carried these domains on our books, promoted
most of them with working sites. Now we are suddenly going to lose all
rights to them?
I don't think so, not without adequate compensation from Verisign, since
they now own Network Solutions.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 8:36 PM
To: easygoing; William X. Walsh
Cc: Opensrs Discuss
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Possible forced deletion of your .org domain.
I believe deleting your .org domain would be illegal. All they can do is
not allow you to renew your existing .org domain if you don't meet the
requirements.
--Kit
> This is one of those rare times that I agree with William. We have spend
> time and money developing our .org names. Why should we lose this
> investment now that Verisign wants to keep the .com registry and is
willing
> to negotiate away the other two to keep it.
>
> We registered these domains under an interpretation of the rules by
Network
> Solutions that allowed it when they needed the money from the extra
> registrations, we have paid for them each year and we see no reason we
> should suddenly be asked to give them up.
>
> If we are requested to give them up, we expect to be compensated for the
> time and money that we have invested in them to date.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of William X. Walsh
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 5:26 PM
> To: Ross Wm. Rader
> Cc: Swerve; opensrs discuss; Scott Allan; Erol Mo; Chuck Charles
> Daminato
> Subject: Re[2]: Possible forced deletion of your .org domain.
>
>
>
> Friday, March 02, 2001, 8:21:56 AM, Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
>> My interpretation of their stance is that commercial interests should be
>> driven from the .org namespace, not the non-commercial interests.
>
> This, also, would be unacceptable. Especially after encouraging
> commercial interests to move into this namespace.
>
> There is no constructive reason for this policy to be permitted to
> move forward, and I hope everyone here will endeavor to vigorously
> oppose it.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
