Re: [ga] .ORG Names

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 02:15:13AM +0100, Marc Schneiders wrote:
[...]
> > More important, "assurances" are a red herring and a rathole and a 
> > crutch.  What matters is what's in the documents.
> 
> Like this, you mean?
> 
> "ICANN has agreed that, at a minimum, existing registrants would be
> permitted to remain in the new .org registry for one renewal cycle
> under its new management." 
> (http://www.icann.org/nsi/sclavos-letter-28feb01.htm)

That's a letter.  It is not one of the contracts.

> This letter makes clearer than all subsequent discussion, what is
> happening. NSI/Verisign wants an impotent ORG.

It may be a language barrier thing, but the above quote simply does not 
mean what you apparently think it means.  Quite the opposite.  

> Naturally we are left
> in the dark as much as possible, until the deal is done. And then
> Verisign can on the basis of the document cited above (published on
> ICANN's website), demand that ORG will be made into something that
> will not harm Verisign's business. How very clever. I do not buy it.

Correction:  You don't *understand* it.

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
--
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