A synopsis of yet another 40k digest of IFWP traffic: a topic that
is within the scope of subscribers capabilities to try to develop into
coherent policy is sidelined into the neverending WW-JW tantrum;
a topic that has nothing to do with IFWP, or formulation of policy,
or subscribers capabilities to affect one way or the other, after
being minced into minor details and opinionated quasi-legalisms, is
described as "getting somewhere." I wish someone could tell me
(backchannel, necessarily) where it is that civility and coherence
have got to.
This list is moderated, Im told. Can Richard or his colleagues
produce a record of the last time they *performed*, by way of
actively moderating anything whatsoever here?
kerry
============
>
> IFWP_LIST Sunday, May 9 1999 Volume 01 : Number 261
>
> Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 23:50:42 GMT
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh)
> Subject: Re: [IFWP] Doing so (was: Criterion for placement on the List
>
> Kumquats
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 17:26:22 +0100
> From: Jeff Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [IFWP] Doing so (was: Criterion for placement on the List
>
> All,
>
> Of course, we have yet another of those very thoughtful and
> enlightening responses from you know who! >;)
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 10:13:57 +0100
> From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: DOJ investigating NSI
>
> > 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.
>
...
> > As such, the US government has the contractual right to obtain a
> > copy of the whois database, in addition to the raw zone files, at
> > the end of the cooperative agreement.
>
> That is great stuff. Why don't you let the USG decide what it wants to
> do? They don't listen to you anyway, not even come election time.
>
> el
>
...
> But, alas, I have added this (redundant) information.
>
>
> End of IFWP_LIST V1 #261
> ************************
>
