>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Non-member submission from [<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:11:00 -0500 (EST)
>
>>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 6 10:10:59 2000
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Received: from mail1.panix.com (mail1.panix.com [166.84.0.212])
> by ns1.vrx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B05F0DD
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:10:57 -0500 (EST)
>Received: from panix2.panix.com (panix2.panix.com [166.84.0.227])
> by mail1.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
> id 26DDF30F10; Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:09:44 -0500 (EST)
>Received: (from ronda@localhost) by panix2.panix.com (8.8.8/8.7.1/PanixN1.0) id
>KAA20512; Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:09:43 -0500 (EST)
>Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:09:43 -0500 (EST)
>From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Giving away a public infrastructure "at no cost to the public"
>
>I have just seen how the US government is using a federal procurement
>contract* for its transfer of the public property of the domain name system,
>root server system, IP numbers and the protocol process into
>private hands. (These are basically the essential infrastructure
>of the Internet).
>
>
> Linkname: ICANN quotation
> URL: http://www.icann.org/general/iana-proposal-02feb00.htm
>
> Linkname: ICANN | IANA Contract Between the U.S. Government and ICANN
> URL: http://www.icann.org/general/iana-contract-09feb00.htm
>
>
>I find a bit curious, to say the least, that the procurement contract
>is being used to do this privatizing of public property and control.
>
>Someone has asked me to quantify what these functions of the
>Internet are worth.
>
>In private hands they are worth trillions today and for years
>to come.
>
>But what is the cost to the public? How does one quantify this?
>
>Is it like taking fire from the world and replacing it with
>a synthetic product that has a price tag on it?
>
>Thinking about what the price to the public is of what is being
>given to ICANN as a procurement contract is an interesting question
>to try to come to grips with. Also it would seem that the nature
>of procurement contracts is to buy something from the private
>sector or some other entity, for the public sector. To use
>such an instrument to transfer public property to some private
>sector entity is not only contrary to what the nature of a
>procurement contract is for, but also seems at the very least
>an unconstitutional activity for a government official whose
>duty is to protect the public property.
>
>What next will be transferred from the public sector to the private
>sector using a "no cost" to the public federal procurement contract?
>
>Perhaps the FCC or the Defense Department? Or perhaps the Presidency.....
>
>This is setting a very serious unconstitutional precedent to say
>the least :-(
>
>I don't know if this is what federal procurement contracts have
>been written to do in the past. However, when I quickly looked at the
>law regarding Federal Procurement Contracts, I didn't find
>any indication they were to be used to transfer public property
>and ownership and control of anything, let alone of the public
>infrastructure of something as important as the Internet into
>private hands and ownership and control.
>
>
>Ronda
>
>
>* For info on Federal Procurement see (48 CFR) http://www.arnet.gov/far
>Federal Acquisition Regulation (48 CFR Chapter 1)
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook
>http://www.ais.org/~ronda/new.papers
>---------------------------------
>9-2 The Amateur Computerist Winter 1999/2000
>"Cone of Silence" US Press Censorship and ICANN
>U.S. Congressional Letters about Internet Infrastructure Give-away
> http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/ACN9-2.txt
> or to subscribe write: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dnso.com
It's about travel on expense accounts to places with good beer. - BKR
