Et tu Bill :-)
At 09:36 PM 3/28/99 , Bill Lovell wrote:
>>> The idea that a particular registrar "owns" a particular gTLD is rather
>>> bothersome. One should be able to register a XXX.yyy name with
>>> a registrar of one's choice. It is of course the NSI claim to own
>>> .com, etc., which started this whole silliness.
[IANAL -- I am not a lawyer]
I am reluctant to describe legal concepts to
a legal scholar, but maybe you can keep me on
track.
As I understand it, whenever someone has rights
to something, they have property rights. This
is not necessarily synonymous with "ownership."
It can be a lease, license, delegation, etc.
Now, if a "registry" (I assume that was what
you meant) has the rights/obligations to edit
a gTLD zone file, then by definition, they have
some form of property rights in that zone file.
If that is correct, then we probably just disagree
as to the extent of those property rights.
Now, before we begin a debate over exactly what
those property rights are, please realize that
the problem is recursive. The Root zone relates
to a gTLD zone the same way a gTLD zone relates
to an SLD zone, etc., ad infinitum.
So, before you claim that Iperdome has *no*
property rights in .per(sm), please explain
why the same arguments wouldn't apply to the
AOL.com zone file, or the ibm.co.au zone
file.
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc.
404-943-0524 http://www.iperdome.com
P.S. ICANN appears to agree with you. They
claim ownership over *all* names in the legacy
name space.
