with the hope that NSI will be stupid enough to sign their registrar
guidelines, they are trying to use NSI to construct a laboratory to be
used in luring the rest of us inside so that they can do to us whatever
they wish. i have talked to four different people today and all four are
of the emphatic opinion that if NSI signs those gvuidelines it is signing
its own death warrent
>Bret A. Fausett a �crit:
>
>> In the press release (written by the PR firm, not ICANN) is this sentence:
>>
>> The Initial Board noted that a uniform dispute settlement
>> mechanism was a necessary element of a competitive
>> registrar system. The Initial Board noted that the
>> scope of this policy should be wider than the cases
>> of abusive registration with which the WIPO report
>> deals, and ultimately cover all commercial dispute
>> issues linked to Domain Name registrations.
>>
>> That last sentence is not in the Board's resolutions. What does it mean?
>>Does it indeed represent a Board sentiment? Was that sentiment unanimous?
>>
>> Can someone who was in Berlin (or better yet, an ICANN Board member)
>>shed some light on this?
>
>My sense of it is that it means ICANN plans to eventually develop
>policies that cover not only cases of cybersquatting but cases of
>competing claims, so that what they are really pretending is to
>become the source of legislation for a whole new branch of law - DNS
>law - that will replace trademark and IP law in the sphere of the
>Internet. ICANN is an ambitious organization.
********************************************************************
The COOK Report on Internet | New handbook just published:IP Insur-
431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA| gency & Transformation of Telecomm.See
(609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) | http://cookreport.com/insurgency.html
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Index to 7 years of COOK Report, how to
subscribe, exec summaries, special reports, gloss at http://www.cookreport.com
********************************************************************
