Re: [ga] serious participation in ICANN processes

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Tim and all remaining assembly members,

  Yeah, I have only a one word thought.  Sue!

Tim Langdell, PhD wrote:

> My own situation might be unique (is it?) but nonetheless frustrating ... I
> was the first to register "edu.com" And we owned and operated the site for
> some months before getting a matter-of-fact letter from NSI telling us that
> they had reconsidered issuing this domain name. They said that because some
> older DNS servers might get confused between "edu" as an SLD and a TLD, they
> had decided to make this a domain not available to anyone (reserved as
> example.com is and the single digit/letter domains).
>
> We argued, we fought. But they were adamant and our site got switched off.
> But they promised us that if they ever changed their policy in respect to
> this domain they would reinstate ownership to us again.
>
> Then, years later, in about 1998, with no communication with us at all, they
> put the domain name back in to the general pool and someone (big surprise)
> grabbed it.
>
> And so we started the complaints all over again .. with no movement
> whatsoever after 3 years of trying. Any one got any thoughts?
>
> Tim
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>
> To: "(Kristy McKee)" <k@widgital.com>
> Cc: <ga@dnso.org>
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 1:02 PM
> Subject: Re[2]: [ga] serious participation in ICANN processes
>
> > 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@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> >
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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