Karl and all,
Karl Auerbach wrote:
> > And that's exactly the problem. We had an excellent, working model for a
> > process
>
> There's the old line, One should not inquire too deeply into the making of
> either sausage or legislation.
My Karl, you are in great form today I must say! >;) Good response here!
>
>
> Whatever process evolves to govern the internet will be complicated and
> full of votes and review structures. It will appear ugly to those who
> long for the perceived beauty of consensus style mechanisms.
How utterly true and for some terribly unfortunate form a one sided
point of view of some IETF participants, such as old Dave here.
>
>
> Even the IETF has evolved away from those halcyon days ... In the old
> days, we simply published and if it was good enough everybody knew what
> was a standard. Now there are various phases of publication, phases of
> review, phases of comment, mandatory intellectual property statements, etc
> etc.
Well said, and a very accurate point indeed.
>
>
> > >As for the delay that these discussions are causing -- well, yes, I am
> > >still paying $35/year to NSI for my domain registrations. But other than
> > >that, I don't see much harm in discussion.
> >
> > You will. But by then it will be too late.
> >
> > And, of course, you won't appreciate your own role in creating that harm.
>
> As far as I see it, the only harm in taking time to think and to build
> appropriate structures is that we are paying NSI $35/year as opposed to
> paying some unknown other entity some unknown other amount.
Well this is not the only negative side, but it certainly is one of the
bigger ones to most.
>
>
> Much as I dislike NSI, I'd rather pay the dollars while we figure out how
> to build a workable system of Internet Governance.
Agreed completely. However this does not seem to be what old Dave
has in mind, judging from his response to you Karl. I wonder why Dave
might feel this way?
>
>
> For ICANN's board to run roughshod over the not-yet-existing membership
> and the not-yet-existing Domain Name Supporting Organization, usurping the
> privileges and rights of both, in order to adopt a worldwide supranational
> law of domain names and trademarks is not a way to begin that system of
> governance.
Completely agreed. An this is one of several points that seems to be
the mantra and decided practice of this ICANN Interim board Cabel.
>
>
> So, OK, I'm creating harm.
>
> But it is a little, small harm when compared to the much greater harm of
> precipitious adoption of a worldwide regime that vastly extends
> trade/service mark rights without ever having those rights considered by,
> much less adopted by, any legislative body anywhere in the world.
Yes indeed you are quite right here Karl. But I am sure that old Dave
could give a hoot less about this trivial principals. He has shown this
tendency before if you recall Karl. Why should he become enlightened
now?
>
>
> WIPO is a long, long way from "running code". So what's the rush to adopt
> it and impose it with finality on everybody on the net?
No reason at all. Unless of course DAVE want's it that way along with
some of his other "Fellow Travelers".
>
>
> --karl--
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
