Re: [ga] Re: WLS call follow-up

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

Elisabeth and all assembly members,

Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:

> Dan wrote:
> >
> > ...is....to....
> > ...remember to renew! This is not rocket science.
> >
>
> You are exactly correct.

  Yes, but this still does not address the delete problem entirely.


>
>
> The point is to:
>  1. periodically pay on time for domain name renewal
> (cf my yestrday message to the NC Transfer)
>
> Therefore one need a mechanism for automated payments.
>
> It seems impossible to me that what is such an elementary
> bank service in France, used by sixty million population,
> does not existe elswhere.
>
> When I sign a contract for water supply, electricity supply,
> telephone (land or cellular), renting flat, private school, etc,
> I have an option to indicate to the service provider
> my bank account number and autorise him for permanent,
> periodical, payment settled in contract.
>
> There is an advantage to both parties in good faith,
> the service provider is granted to get paid periodically
> and automaticaly from my bank to his bank, I am granted
> to have peace and not forget a deadline. Such bank
> autorisation remain under my control - at any
> time I may ask my bank to stop it, should problems arise.
>
> Last not the least, banks are using universal system
> for accounts, it is called IBAN - International Bank
> Account Number.  It fits into the Internet quite well
> - IBANs start with ISO 3166-1 code.

  Yes IBAN has been around for some time now..
But again this does not solve the delete problem in it's
entirety.  Of course neither does WLS.

>
>
> Elisabeth
> --
>
> > From owner-ga@dnso.org Tue May 21 22:38 MET 2002
> > Message-ID: <3CEAAFD9.FEC51F18@videotron.ca>
> > Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 16:36:41 -0400
> > From: Dan Steinberg <synthesis@videotron.ca>
> > X-Sender: "Dan Steinberg" <VLTUPIPL@relais.videotron.ca> (Unverified)
> > X-Accept-Language: en,fr-CA
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > To: Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
> > CC: ga@dnso.org, "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com>
> > Subject: [ga] Re: WLS call follow-up
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> > Sure. Sorry for the call quality. I'm not sure what was wrong cause I
> > had no trouble hearing myself.
> >
> > Basically the way I see things is that the WLS proposal is essentially
> > IP neutral. I fail to see how it helps anyone with respect to IP unless
> > you insert some tribunal or UDRP or other 'judge' in the process when
> > selecting someone to be in the queue for a particular domain.
> >
> > I think that there are enough issues with WLS as is without introducing
> > irrelevancies and things we are not qualified to deal with.
> >
> > I both reject Chuck's argument that its better for the IP constituency
> > as well as the argument that a domain holder could lose out or feel
> > compelled because of IP issues.
> >
> > Were it true that WLS helps IP holders, snapnames would already have had
> > everyone in existence as a client.  The simple solution to concerns
> > about losing your intellectual property, which were always
> > around before WLS (which only makes it easier for someone to grab it
> > *once* you have lost it)
> >
> > ...is....to....
> > ...remember to renew! This is not rocket science.
> >
> > And...as a fall back...to use a hypothetical example, should Dan
> > Steinberg use WLS to get att.com when
> > someone at ATT falls asleep...ATT (as they always did) has recourse
> > under UDRP, lanham act, etc. If the hypothetical "Allied Telesyn
> > Technologies" grabs that name...using WLS or any other existing means...
> > then...too bad for the people who forgot to re-register.  I do not see
> > this as an issue in the context of WLS. Any risks that exist already
> > existed before WLS. WLS is merely a way to find out in advance who would
> > get it, no more.  It just gets someone potential preferential treatment
> > in the event of a deletion, nothing more i.e. if ATT makes a
> > mistake...it just decides who gets *lucky*, and does nothing to enhance
> > the possibility of ATT making a mistake in the first place.
> >
> >
> > pure and simple I think it is as irrelevant to WLS as today's weather in
> > idaho.
> >
> > I was disturbed by people making all sorts of claims that this is an IP
> > issue when it isnt, especially people who obviously are not experts on
> > intellectual property at all.
> >
> > Does this help?
> >
> > Thomas Roessler wrote:
> > >
> > > Following up to today's WLS call, there are some questions with
> > > which I'd like to grill some of you folks; in particular Chuck
> > > Gomes and Dan Steinberg. ;)
> > >
> > > 1. Chuck: In the presentation you made to the task force and all
> > > those attending the call, you talked about registrars with a total
> > > market share of 57.5% supporting the proposal.  I already mentioned
> > > during the call that, after substracting Verisign's own market share
> > > of about 40%, we end up at a mere 17.5% of market share; this is
> > > comparable to the market share you mention as being opposed to WLS.
> > > I believe that it was Rick Wesson who asked how much of that
> > > remaining market share in favor of WLS actually belongs to
> > > registrars owned by or affiliated with Verisign.  Could you please
> > > provide some clarification of this on the GA list?  Thank you.
> > >
> > > 2. Dan: I may have misunderstood you due to the extremely poor
> > > sound quality of your contribution, but I seemed to understand that
> > > you were suggesting that the task force should leave IP and
> > > competition aspects out.  Could you please elaborate on the
> > > rationale for this?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > --
> > > Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
> >
> > --
> > Dan Steinberg
> >
> > SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
> > 35, du Ravin          phone: (613) 794-5356
> > Chelsea, Quebec               fax:   (819) 827-4398
> > J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca
> > --
> > 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

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders 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:  972-244-3801 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