CIRA is clearly in violation of the NAFTA accord between US, CANADA and MEXICO
NAFTA covers Services as well as goods and prior Trademarks in one Country take
precedence over a later filling in another.
http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/english/nafta/nafta.htm
Article 1202: National Treatment
1. Each Party shall accord to service providers of another Party treatment no less
favorable than that it accords, in like circumstances,
to its own service providers.
Read Part Five: Chapter Twelve, Article 1205 Local Presence
Article 1205: Local Presence
No Party may require a service provider of another Party to establish or maintain a
representative office or any form of enterprise, or
to be resident, in its territory as a condition for the cross-border provision of a
service.
Or Part Six: Chapter Seventeen Article 1708 Trademarks
Lots of other issues here but there are plenty of Canadian Service Providers who
host City.CA names for companies here in California with no presence in Canada.
Requiring me to have Presence in Canada to Run a Name.CA web site is a clear
violation
of NAFTA , Granted the Name.US is screwed up by ISI but maybe the US and CANADA can
follow Mexico's example here.
And for all who have emailed me about the US controlling .Com /Net/Org Yes good or
bad
I feel the US exercises Control over this name space and will not give it up to any
International Government body.
Alan DeRossett
Digital Starlight Communications Inc.
Charles Daminato wrote:
> CIRAs rules clearly overrule NAFTA, which is Fair Trade in goods no?
>
> Charles Daminato
> TUCOWS Product Manager
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Alan DeRossett wrote:
>
> > If CIRA wont honor the NAFTA Fair Trade agreement allowing US companies equal
> > access too the Canadian Market (ie:Name Space) Maybe US companies will have to
> > block names.ca that confilct with American Companies. names.com .I have several
> > domains that are US trademarks we have the .com .net .mx and want to register
> > .ca . Maybe Quebec will gain their independence and CIRA will lose the .CA TLD
> >
> > Alan DeRossett
> > Digital Starlight Communications Inc.
> >
> > dnsadmin wrote:
> >
> > > ** ATTENTION -- IMPORTANT **
> > >
> > > Apparently CIRA has been investigating customers. Out of the blue they ask
> > > for proof that the registrant of a .CA domain name is actually a legal
> > > entity.
> > >
> > > If your customer registered themselves as a Corporation, they will have to
> > > prove that the corporation is legally registered, the full legal name is
> > > used, etc, etc until CIRA is satisfied or they risk losing the domain name.
> > >
> > > I could consider this reasonable, if www.example.ca was being used by an
> > > American Company, with U.S. information on it, and CIRA becomes aware, and
> > > does an investigation.
> > >
> > > But to arbitrarily select a person, regardless of their website content, and
> > > demand proof that they are indeed Canadian and the company is legally
> > > registered under the same exact name, is a hardship on the general consumer.
> > >
> > > People paid for their .CA domain, they already agreed to the
> > > terms/conditions, they have build their businesses around these names, they
> > > are CANADIAN, and the business they are conducting is in CANADA. ---> but
> > > now CIRA says "because there is a contractual agreement between CIRA and the
> > > registrant (see the Registant Agreement), the full legal name of the
> > > registrant must be used and be verifiable."
> > >
> > > What other nonsense can CIRA drum up in order to scare people away from the
> > > red-tape complexities of owning a .CA ?
> > >
> > > If these keeps up, as a reseller, we'll need to raise our .CA registration
> > > prices in order to accomodate the extra work involved in contacting
> > > registrants and guiding them through the legal entity verification process
> > > with CIRA.
> > >
> > > Comments??
> >
> >
