tony: minor typo in example # 3 below : it should read : avoidance of conflict of interests - i.e. REGISTRAR owns or has a financial interest in a company that speculates or facilitates speculation of domain names i apologize ken stubbs -----Original Message----- From: Ken Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Becky Burr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Esther Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mike Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, February 16, 1999 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: Central Authority >hello tony.. > >i personally believe that there has to be some sort of basic set of codes >with some enforcement mechanism to assure the integrity of the registrar. > >essentially at this point in time in the com,net & org registry there is >only essentially one registrar as i define the process and that is NSI. >(all the rest are currently agents) NSI has complete control over the final >access to the registry and there is no "sharing" of the registry access >outside of the company (to the best of my knowledge). >in effect.. i assume that they are totally responsible for any actions taken >to change information in and to maintain their specific "registry data". >with the advent of shared registries in the gtld's. there has to be some >basic standards established to protect the integretity of the registry. > >i call it a code of conduct but someone else may use another term for the >following examples: (this is just a short list) >1. assurance of proper documentation for domain name ownership transfers >2. insuring quick and timely adherence to registrant file update requests >3. avoidance of conflict of interests - i.e. registrant owns company that >speculates & facilitates speculation of domain names >4. proper financial control over fiduciary relationships & transactions >(i.e. registrant pays registrar for renewal of 1000 domain names and >registrar goes bankrupt prior to paying registry) > >rules,standards, codes ... call them what you will but i feel that they are >essential components for insuring confidence in the growth in the registry >system. > >ken >p.s. i feel advocating business standards or codes of ethics only enhances >public confidence. as a CPA it has worked quite well for the profession as a >whole. as far as other internet -related activities are concerned. i leave >it up to them to determine what is in their best self-interest, although i >would assume that many internet industry trade associations currenty have >"codes" to help instill confidence in doing business with their members.. >(the bar association also comes into mind here as well..) > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: A.M. Rutkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Becky Burr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; >[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; >[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; >[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Esther Dyson ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mike Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; >[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Tuesday, February 16, 1999 8:47 AM >Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: Central Authority > > >>Ken, >> >>>1. are you saying that you don't have a position on a code of ethics for >>>registrars >> >>Do you know of any other Internet related service where the >>providers are subject to a "code of ethics?" Should ISPs >>be subject to a code of ethics? ECommerce providers? >>How about telephone companies? >> >>The reality today is that there are few services in the >>communications field where providers are subject to codes. >>They are hard to devise and avoid being discriminatory. >>They are difficult to enforce. They are often abused. >>They are fraught with liabilities of all kinds. Once you >>start, where do you end? >> >>Do you want to open up this Pandora's Box? >> >> >>--tony >> > >
