[IFWP] Re: Common misconceptions

[Jeff Williams]

His FUDness, Sir Kent the Crispy of songbird and all,

Kent Crispin wrote:

On Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 08:36:02PM -0700, Christopher Ambler wrote:
> >2) IBM doesn't have to recover any investment to make .ibm
> >attractive to it.  This condition is true for tens of thousands,
> >perhaps hundreds of thousands of companies.
>
> Yup, you're right, I guess we might as well not have any more
> TLDs and let NSI continue to run the show. Since they'll never
> give up what they now have, limiting the number of competitors
> is an artificial barrier and subject to unfair competition challenge,
> so it's a question of leaving it as it is (still open to legal challenge)
> or making the requirements for entry reasonably intelligent.
>
> Too bad you've not come up with a good solution. Ah, that's right,
> we need an INTELLIGENT solution. Sit down, Kent.

What are you talking about?

Here's what I was saying -- perhaps you missed it:

IBM is just as technically capable of running a .ibm TLD as IOD is of
running a .web.  There are thousands and thousands of businessess as
capable as IODesign of running a TLD -- any Fortune 500 company could
come up with the resources in a day.

  Excuse me Your FUDness, Sir Kent the Crispy, it is doubtful that
just an Fortune 500 company such as say, Exxon, Mobil, or Alcoa
could acquire or has the technical expertise or breadth of expertise
to properly manage a TLD of any sort.  Many Fortune 500 companies
have trouble managing their own web pages presently.

In terms of legal rights, IBM
and all those thousands of other companies have just as much legal
right to run a TLD as IODesign does -- they all have trademarked
names, etc.  Therefore, if IODesign is given a proprietary TLD, then
the precedent will be set, and all those other companies will have to
be given a TLD.

  I don't recall Chris stating definitively recently that he is interested
in running a proprietary TLD.  Hence, Your FUDness, Sir Kent the Crispy,
your comment here is both misleading and invalid as a reasonable
premise for your argument.

There is no legal or moral way that ICANN could
discriminate against any technically qualified company, and there are
thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of technically qualified
companies.

  This statement, Your FUDness, Sir Kent the Crispy, standing alone,
is correct and hence shows that there is little reason for ICANN or NSI
of any other organization should refuse or block .WEB being entered into
the current legacy roots with IOD being it's first registry and Registrar also
honoring any SLD's that have already been registered as Domains
in the .WEB name space.

 

And, believe me, if it has the opportunity, IBM will get a .ibm TLD
-- thousands of companies will.  It's not because they want to sell
domains, it's because of the marketing factor for their own brand --
why dilute your name with ibm.com when you can have just ibm?

  How would it necessarily dilute ibm.com in any fashion in that IBM
has a TM on that Domain presently, Your FUDness, Sir Kent the Crispy?

 

So, if you let in IODesign, you *have* to let in everybody.  And
that is probably not going to happen.

  As has now again been shown you premise are not valid, an hence
your conclusion is not a valid conclusion, Your FUDness, Sir Kent the Crispy.
Just as before in the bad old days of the gTLD-MoU/IAHC.

 

The obvious answer is that you don't have proprietary TLDs at all;
ICANN maintains all the gTLDs as a public trust, including a bunch
of new ones, and ICANN contracts out the registry operators job to
multiple registry operators.

  This is one potential model or direction, but not the only one that
would best or properly fit the needs of the stakeholder community.
In addition this sort of process is Ripe for both manipulation, favoritism
and other abuses.

 

That is, IODesign might well bid to run the registry for one or more
TLDs, but those TLDs won't be owned or controlled by IODesign.  If
there is a .web in the root it will be a public domain .web, and it
will be run by whatever registry operator wins the bid.

  Now you are repeating yourself, Your FUDness, Sir Kent the Crispy.
This sort of practice is sometimes associated with senility or other mental
maladies.

 

This gives multiple registry operators, and therefore competition at
both the registry and registrar level, but allows ICANN (and
therefore the Internet community at large) to control what TLDs are
in the root.

  This is very funny indeed.  To date the ICANN Interim Board has made
nearly every decision unilaterally and distinctly in violation of the
White Paper and the stated positions of the Stakeholder community.
This is of course due to the FACT that there is no oversight of the
ICANN Interim Board, no transparency due to the ICANN Interim Board
meetings are closed meetings, and little to no accountability except
to themselves.

 

--
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208