[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ga-full] Re: [ga] Re: Single Letter Domains
Dear Mr. Roberts, the ICANN Board of Directors, DNSO, and
Other Interested Parties:
This email constitutes an official demand for the sale of
"k.com" to the undersigned without delay. Regardless of what
many at your and your supporting organizations have said to me about the
procedures and policies surrounding the single-letter domain matter, the
entire issue is obviously moot given that precedent has been firmly set
with respect to the registration of four single-letter domains -- in this
case, to four separate and private parties.
Once again, this email constitutes an official demand for the sale of
"k.com" to the undersigned without delay.
Sincerely yours,
John C. Kaufman
President
Kaufman Communications
San Francisco, CA
+(1) 415-864-2300
-----------------------------------------
At 02:04 PM 5/27/2000 -0700, Simon Higgs wrote:
At 11:17 AM 5/27/00 -0700, Mike Roberts
wrote:
Could someone please explain how the following domains have already been
registered - some as long ago as 1997 and long before ICANN
existed?
http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=q.com
JG (Q225-DOM), Athens, GA 30606, US
Record created on 30-Mar-1999
http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=x.com
X.com Corporation (X880-DOM), Palo Alto, CA 94301, US
Record created on 20-Oct-1999
http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=z.com
United Internet Artists, Inc (Z509-DOM), Burbank, CA 91504, US
Record created on 20-Apr-2000
http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=i.net
Inet Corp. (I737-DOM), Roadtown, BRITISH VIRGIN ISLES
Record created on 10-Dec-1999
http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=q.net
Q Networks, San Juan, PUERTO RICO
Record created on 10-Mar-2000
http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=x.org
The Open Group (X57-DOM), Reading, Berks RG1 1AX, UNITED KINGDOM
Record created on 18-Jan-1997.
Mr. Kaufman -
I am sure that I am not the only person on this address list that stands
in awe of your entrepreneurial instincts. Unfortunately, you have
lots of company out there. That's why there is an ICANN policy
process through which the community can arrive at equitable approaches to
the use of domain names.
With regard to various comments about legal matters in your emails, this
list is not a useful place to air your opinions. If your counsel
has reason to believe that you have a particular legal right to any
domain name, then he or she should send a properly supported brief to
ICANN's General Counsel, Louis Touton, who will take it under
advisement.
- Mike Roberts
At 10:19 -0700 5/27/00, John Kaufman wrote:
Dear Messrs Roberts and Alvestrand, DNSO
Members of the ICANN Board, and the ICANN Board:
I will disregard the indiscreet email sent by Mr. Jeff Williams to this
list.
I appreciate your response to my query. Mr. Alvestrand, your fairness in
proposing a lottery for the purpose of disposing the 78 single-letter
domains (.com, .net, .org) is kindly noted.
With not all matters of discussion or action being always equal or fair,
a lottery would not work for the purpose of serving my personal agenda,
which is to acquire the "k.com" domain. I understand that the
prohibition of the sale of these domains was grandfathered into ICANN as
a result of certain actions taken by Mr. Jon Postel and the IANA. But, I
also understand that no legal standing whatsoever exists that prevents
the immediate sale of single-letter domains, and that the only reason
said domains are being withheld is that Mr. Postel simply wanted it that
way.
I admit to not being particularly concerned about the way ICANN by-laws
are written or enforced. However, I am concerned about the rule of law
which, when applied in this case, could hold ICANN and its supporting
organization(s) in violation of exclusionary practices, namely, the
withholding of certain property (such as single-letter domains) when
other like (similar) property (such as two-letter domains) are not being
withheld.
Therefore, I respectfully submit to DNSO and ICANN that, first, the
"k.com" domain be sold and released to the undersigned without
delay, and that single-letter domains be opened for sale to the general
public. If it is decided that this action can or will not be taken,
kindly advise me of the specific reason so public debate and legal review
can begin.
Respectfully submitted,
John C. Kaufman
President
Kaufman Communications
San Francisco, CA
May 27, 2000
--------------------------------------------
Dear Mr Kaufman,
Let me clarify the situation with regard to single letter domains for
you. Some years ago, Jon Postel in his capacity as IANA reserved these
domains because in his judgment doing so would contribute to successful
operation of the domain name system for all users. Like other
pre-existing IANA policies, this policy is being continued under ICANN
management until such time as a policy proceeding conducted under our
organizational structure and Bylaws comes to the conclusion that these
domains should be treated in some other manner.
They are not reserved for ICANN's use, they are reserved from any use at
this time.
If you believe that there is sufficient reason to change the policy
treatment of these domains, then the appropriate place for you to begin
is with ICANN's Domain Name Support Organization, information about which
may be found at
www.dnso.org.
Thank you for your interest in our work.
- Mike
Michael M. Roberts
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At 08:13 AM 5/27/2000 +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
Dear mr. Kaufman:
These are my particular responses to the issues you raise, and have no
particular weight; I have asked you before to join the GA list if you
want to participate in a discussion about them.
You raise two interesting points in your message:
1) Should single letter domains be delegated under .com, .net and
.org?
2) If they should be delegated, who should be the recipient of the
delegation?
The first question then leads to the third question:
3) Who decides what domains to delegate under a top level domain?
We have multiple conflicting precedents on this question:
- The NSI decision not to delegate domain names containing the
"network seven"
was dropped recently, after a period where NSI as a registry
permitted it,
even while NSI the registrar did not.
- The attempt to sell .com names ending in a dash was stopped after an
ICANN
decision was made that such names were not within the
specifications
On the question of single letter domains, there are precedents on this in
other contexts; the .dk domain allows them, the .no domain does not, for
instance. So clearly this has been decided in the past on a per-domain
basis.
There is as far as I know no precedent for requiring a registy to
register a name at all. While the trend recently has been that many
registries will be happy to sell any name you want to buy, many (like
.se, .gov or .int) are operated under far more restrictive rules. Again,
on a per domain basis.
I thus have a problem seeing the precedent for forcing the sale of
"k.com", given that the policy in place is not being unfairly
applied - nobody can get it.
All that said, I don't see at the moment any particular reason for
escrowing those 26 domains in .com - your request for a change of policy
may have merit, if we can figure out who has the responsibility to change
that policy.
On the question of who gets the domain, I am far less uncertain: If a
policy change is decided, there must be a fair method of allocating the
domains.
"First-come-first-served" has served us well in the past, but
in this instance, it is likely to be decided on sub-millisecond timing,
given the number of people who will take an interest.
A more explicit form of lottery will probably seem fairer in this
particular case.
My thoughts.
Harald T. Alvestrand
------------------------------
Dear Mr. Alvestrand and the DNSO Members of the ICANN Board:
> >
> >I have been directed to you by Mr. Michael Roberts, CEO of
ICANN,
> >regarding a change in the policy treatment of single-letter
domains (e.g.,
> >the sale of said domains to the general public).
> >
> >After reviewing the charters, by-laws and other documents of
both ICANN
> >and IANA, I see no precedent that would stand a legal test that
would deny
> >the sale of single-letter domains to the general public. Nor do
I see a
> >precedent that would stand a legal test that would disallow the
sale of
> >single-letter domains to the public. If I have missed such a
precedent,
> >please so advise.
> >
> >Therefore, I would like to propose that the Names Council of the
DNSO, as
> >a supporting organization of ICANN with respect to policy issues
related
> >to the Domain Name System, propose to ICANN that the
pre-existing IANA
> >policy barring the sale of single-letter domains now being
continued under
> >ICANN management be struck down and, at the same time, that the
domain
> >"k.com" be the first such domain to be sold under the
new policy to the
> >undersigned.
> >
> >Please be advised that, in the interest of the general public, I
may issue
> >a press statement next week to the effect that a change in this
policy has
> >been requested.
> >
> >Thank you very much.
> >
> >John C. Kaufman
> >President
> >Kaufman Communications
> >San Francisco, CA
Best Regards,
Simon Higgs
--
It's a feature not a bug...
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html