In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Karl Auerbach
writes:
> > No, there may be a real *ADMINISTRATIVE* need for those. There is *NO*
> > RFC (that I am aware of) *REQUIRING* a WHOIS data base. If they do
> > that, they are very helpful, but it is of course their intellectual
> > property and thus they should be entitled to just compensation at the
> > very least.
>
> NSI was hired to perform registrations and, per amendment #4 to
> charge a fee. The contract requires, at the end of the contract,
> for NSI to turn over *all* materials needed for a sucessor to pick
> up the job. In order for that to happen, the sucessor needs the
> list of who registered which domain and when. So you can call it
> the property of NSI, but the fact of the matter is that the US
> government can get it, and use it, and hand it over to a sucessor to
> NSI (or anyone else it pleases.)
Now we are gettign somewehre. You are agreeing that it is intellectual
property of NSI, and they might have to produce it to USG, provided
they can't convince twelve bums off the stree that are too stupid to
avoid jury duty, that they don't.
> You can say that some operators run small operations in which they may not
> keep track of who registered what. But that's not what we are discussing
> here -- the issue is whether NSI has to turn over the contact database.
No, the issue is hwther it is intrinsic to the DNS, which it is not,
and whether it is intellectual property, which it is. Then, maybe,
comes the wuestion of whether it falls under the agreement.
Personally I think they would have to hand it over, actually.
el
