At 12:08 AM 3/25/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Thanks Bill -- I have been making that point now for about two years,
>and you are the first person to restate it in other words!
>
>I welcome your support for the concept that ICANN is claiming to onw
>things that they have not been conceived.
>
>My claim is that the "ICANN owns all names" business model is terribly
>flwaed, and that the correc tmodel is that they hold advertising space
>in their zone file, and registrants rent that space to adversise their
>DNS names, wwwhich are owned by the registrant.
Where ICANN (or WIPO, for that matter) get the idea that they are both
houses of Congress and the President all rolled up into one, and can
change the law of this country at their whim, is beyond me. Sure, they're
under the auspices of the "USG," i.e., the DOC, but neither is the DOC
both houses of Congress and the President. Heads will roll before this
little drama is played out, and I and a lot of other people are packin'
whoppin' big swords.
Bill Lovell
