On Sat, 28 Aug 1999, Kent Crispin wrote: > In any case, many people believe that a government has fairly strong > rights vis a vis choice of which registry runs the associated ccTLD, > so this example is perhaps not a good one. Government policies > concerning encryption might be more interesting. What people believe when it comes to government rights to ccTLD's is not the issue nor does it matter. What does matter are the principles in law that apply to you statement. I know of no law which provides country nations to this right. Is this right you mention a moral law, a law of equity. What law is it that justifies your position. Regards Jeff Mason -- Planet Communication & Computing Facility [EMAIL PROTECTED] Public Access Internet Research Publisher 1 (212) 894-3704 ext. 1033
Re: [IFWP] Latest on the Australian censorship
Planet Communications Computing Facility Sun, 29 Aug 1999 03:30:58 -0700
- Re: [IFWP] fundi... Dan Steinberg
- Re: [IFWP] fundi... Jeff Williams
- Re: [IFWP] fundi... Michael Sondow
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on the Aus... Jeff Williams
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on the Australi... Joe Sims
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on the Aus... Jeff Williams
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on the Aus... Patrick Greenwell
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on the Aus... Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on the... Patrick Greenwell
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on the... Kent Crispin
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on... Planet Communications Computing Facility
- Re: [IFWP] Lates... Jeff Williams
- Re: [IFWP] ... Planet Communications Computing Facility
- Re: [IF... Jeff Williams
- Re: [IFWP] ... Brian C. Hollingsworth
- Re: [IFWP] Lates... Brian C. Hollingsworth
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on the Aus... A.M. Rutkowski
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on the... Jeff Williams
- Re: [IFWP] GAC: mandatory or... Mark R Measday
- Re: [IFWP] Latest on the Australi... Richard J. Sexton
- RE: [IFWP] Latest on the Australi... R . Gaetano
