Re: [ga-roots] Re: [ga] Alternate Root Memo sent to Names Council

["NameCritic" <watch-dog@inreach.com>]

Good answers Jeffsey and a good suggestion that he approach Leah for a deal.
For my response to it, read the public forum at ICANN in the new tlds
section.

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

----- Original Message -----
From: "List Admin" <patrick@corliss.net>
To: "Jefsey Morfin" <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>
Cc: "Jeff Neuman" <Jeff.Neuman@NeuLevel.com>; "[ga-roots]"
<ga-roots@dnso.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 5:29 AM
Subject: [ga-roots] Re: [ga] Alternate Root Memo sent to Names Council


> From: Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>
> To: <ga@dnso.org>
> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 6:35 AM
> Subject: Re: [ga] Alternate Root Memo sent to Names Council
>
> Dear Jeff,
> this document of yours is not without interest. It mainly shows
> how weak is your position and how tough it will be for you to
> play your part in the iCANN manipulation of yours you have
> provoqued?
>
> 1) you first play only on the word authoritative in a totally wrong
>     way as the authoritative is the one who tells the IP address.
>
>     But let assume this new meaning, it is quite dangerous as I
>     will respond "the authoritative root for *my* machine is he
>     one *I* chose".
>
>     Otherwise I will sue you and the iCANN for hacking. i.e.
>     imposing data in my machine that I do not want. In a
>     very similar way to a cookie.
>
>     BTW this word is poor for you: if the root is authoritative
>     it is on other roots. These other roots are therefore known
>     accepted and cared about. They belong to the DNS system
>
> 2) then you say you don't take away the ".biz" business of
>     ARNI. This might be true should you be able to produce
>     two evidences;
>
>     -  that you give your head to cut that the DNS will never
>        be modified in the centuries to come.
>     -  that you give your head to cut that the real network as
>        it is built by thousands of ISPs will *never* permit that,
>        all its components working well, a mail sent to a
>        host under your bis.biz will *never* reach a host under
>        the same domain name under .biz. (and you put that
>        as a notice on your site).
>
>     I asked Vint why he decided not to warn the DoC about
>     that risk. He chose not to reply. I think this is your best
>     protection when collision problem will arise. Tell that Vint
>     said there will never be. And quote your today letter as a
>     testimony you believed in his word today.
>
> 3) You come through the lengthy iCANN process to chose
>     you. You forget that this process was to be a "proof of
>     concept" and that your proposition - cf. other iCANN docs,
>     multiple authorized comments and lack of claim in your
>     own documents - has no new concept, except one.
>
>     This is that you chose to apply for an existing TLD
>     in real operation (actually one of the most active). You
>     though that iCANN could be interested in using you against
>     the alternative roots. And the iCANN took it. Bravo!
>
>     But how long. You are going to invest on disputed grounds.
>     You are just a market test for the iCANN and a tool. You
>     probably foresaw that in your business plan, hiring more
>     lawyers than techies. You also want to fight the DNSO/IPC
>     people (good luck). This will make the head lines. Good
>     advertizing you think. Fighting on several fronts together,
>     so you may hide your loss on one behind a victory on
>     another. May be a good plan, but please do not speak
>     about stability :-)
>
> 4) Another weakness of your document is that you base
>     most of your argumentation on the iCANN. Authoritative
>     root (I love that new word to define the root authoritative
>     on my PC !). Authoritative in choosing new TLDs: poor
>     iCANN which will not be able to pick .usa if they wish?
>
>     -  dangerous as you do not know what will be the iCANN
>        one year from now.
>     -  you will provide no defense to iCANN against non
>        iCANN yet legacy TLDs (I suggest you read RFCs
>        carefully). Louis Touton will be sorry for that....
>     -  how will you relate with Chinese people?
>
> 5) There is nowever a very interesting development for
>     which we should all thank you. This is the very good
>     compendium on the fact that a TLD cannot be protected.
>     Very good indeed.
>
>     If I read you correctly: .web could not pretend that
>     another .web had no right to use .web. Because the
>     Judge said: "who gave you the right you claim?"
>
>     All you document says: "I have that right because the
>     iCANN gave it to me (or the DoC)!" Great. But who
>     gave the right to them first?
>
>     Since no right can be established on a TLD.... Since
>     you demonstrate it.
>
>
> 6) you have a set of minor points of lesser interest:
>     you make a salad mix of them. Some might be
>     of interest to discuss for fun. Endless disputes..
>
> Frankly two three years from now, I am afraid this
> piece of hard work will be used as an example of the
> 2001 iCANN philosophy oddities.
>
> Why not just to make a deal with Leah ("the first biz
> in .biz"). You would then be quoted as the cute one
> who tricked the iCANN. You lend he trap, they took
> the bait, and you got the day. You would be the first
> alternative/legacy TLD. (BTW this may be what you
> call authoritative.... ! :-) )
>
> Cheers.
>
> Jefsey
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Neuman, Jeff <Jeff.Neuman@NeuLevel.com>
> To: <ga@dnso.org>
> Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 08:02:59 -0500
> Subject: [ga] Alternate Root Memo sent to Names Council
>
> > All,
> >
> > Enclosed is a memorandum that we sent to the Names Council on the issue
of
> > Alternate Roots, specifically with regards to the Atlantic Root.
> >
> > Please let me know if you have any questions.
> >
> >  <<Alternate Roots[1].doc>>
> >
> > > Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
> > > Director, Policy and Intellectual Property
> > > NeuLevel, Inc.
> > > p: (202) 533-2733
> > > f: (202) 533-2970
> > > e-mail: Jeff.Neuman@NeuLevel.com
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

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