Re[2]: [ga] serious participation in ICANN processes

["William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>]

Hello Kristy,

Friday, April 06, 2001, 1:50:46 PM, Kristy McKee wrote:

> The Internet worked better when there was a monopoly.
> The rules were
> simple:  first come first serve.
> Problems were easily resolved over
> trademark and copyright issues within the courts, etc.  I think ICANN is 
> several steps backwards.

That's not entirely accurate.  NSI's flawed domain dispute policy
enabled a trademark holder to get a domain actually shut off until the
respondent actually won in court.

I don't consider that to be preferable, while I also agree the UDRP is
fatally flawed, at the least it doesn't turn off a domain until a
decision has been made, even if those decisions are being made in a
manner inconsistent with law and by a method which gives automatic
preference to the complainant.

I also take exception with Roberto's giving ICANN credit for
"breaking" NSI's monopoly.  That was going to happen regardless, the
green paper and white paper processes led to that.  ICANN just simply
assisted along a process that they didn't initiate nor decide on.

-- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:william@userfriendly.com


--
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