RE: Re[2]: [ga-icann] interesting California law to consider

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: owner-ga-icann@dnso.org On Behalf Of NameCritic
|> Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 11:41 AM
|> To: dassa@dhs.org
|> Cc: ga - icann
|> Subject: Re: Re[2]: [ga-icann] interesting California law to consider

|> WalMart moving in next to a small shop doesn't suggest the shop owner
close
|> up either but that is the result and when you do that on a consistant
basis
|> unfair business practices does come into play.

Except that in the situation we are talking about is equilivent to the
small shops opening up next to WalMart and then complaining about Walmart
being there and having similar products to those introduced in the new
shops.  The analogy doesn't support the claim and is actually in support of
ICANN.


|> You don't see that as one-sided? If the alt roots created a .com they
would
|> be wrong, but if ICANN does the same to a dot biz it's ok? Do you reread
|> your own posts?

Did you read what was written?  I didn't say the alt.roots creating a .com
would be wrong (although I think it would be suicidal).  If one did, they
would have to be careful not to imping on the legacy name space and market
it appropriately.  The main problem we have at present is the alt.roots
trying to muscle in on the legacy name space.  If they maintain their
distinct name space and market it as such, there is no problem.  ICANN by
introducing a .biz is not interferring with the other name space, it does
not attempt to include alt.root name spaces into the legacy root.  The only
conflict the introduction of .biz into the legacy root that may occur is if
alt.root operators try to maintain an inclusion of the legacy root name
space into their own.  To use your own analogy, the small shop owner trying
to build a shop that surrounds WallMart.


|> That is exactly where you miss the point. It doesn't NEED TO BENEFIT
ICANN!

Please note I didn't state it had to benefit ICANN.  I too mentioned users
etc.  And I went further to state there has not been any arguments put
forward there are advantages for users that outweigh the disadvantages.

|> The policies are to benefit the users. These are not mega
|> corporations in commercial competition. If it was you would be correct.
This is
|> a nonprofit entity that is supposed to be acting on MY behalf and on the
|> behalf of all regular users of the Internet, but instead it is doing
just as
|> you stated, acting as if it were in a corporate battle for some market
share. You
|> somehow have gotten it in your head that this is what ICANN is
|> supposed to do. Therefore you defend corporate policies that belong
somewhere like
|> Verisign, AT&T, and GM. The United Way doesn't make a habit of crushing
|> smaller Nonprofits nor do they attempt to shut them out. That
|> is what ICANN should be following as a nonprofit model not following the
|> other corporate examples.

No, you are attributing ideas to me that are not correct.  Although I see
no real problem with a non-profit operating along commercial lines.  They
are much more viable and vibrant by doing so.

The main point is that the commercial operations of the alt.roots as they
now stand have no benefits for users that outweigh the disadvantages.  It
is my firm belief that ICANN, although slow to introduce new TLD's, offers
the best protection for users and provides the most stable and reliable
name space.

Why should ICANN assist and encourage commercial alt.root operations?  Why
should ICANN cooperate with alt.root operators?

To promote competition?  We don't want competition at the name space level,
it is counter productive.  ICANN is introducing more TLD's and that process
should become more efficient in future.  There should be enough competition
at that level to satisfy all needs.

If someone has good arguments for the Internet to have open slather at the
name space level where anyone can set up a root server and establish
whatever TLD's they want (which we do have now) and for ICANN to cooperate
with those operators and include them into the legacy root (which we don't
have), I certainly would like to hear about them.

One thing people have to keep in mind.  Any policy ICANN establishes to
recognise any alt.root will cause a rush for others to get the same
benefits.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-icann@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-icann" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html