<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [ga] VeriSign May Ditch Domain Deal
What
does so called SPAM have to do with separation of Registry and
Registrar?
What
does marketing have to do with separation of Registry and
Registrar?
No
conclusive evidence has ever been produced to substantiate the rumor you
mention, undoubtedly because it is just a rumor. Again, this has nothing
to do with Registry/Registrar separation because the NSI Registrar has the same
exact access to the SRS as all other registrars.
I'm
still waiting for facts instead of rumors and suspicions. I am perfectly
comfortable with you having a your own negative opinions about the current
situation but I am not all comfortable with you making charges that are
false.
Chuck
The bloody SPAM is enough
by itself. And as an attorney, I know
how "Chinese walls" work -- they
don't. How it was that "marketing"
ever got into the purely
technical issue of running a root and recording
domain name registrations
is beyond me, except for the fact that NSI
has NEVER done anything without
first thought to its bottom line.
The "examples" pertinent to this issue
itself are of course within the walls
of Verisign, so I would invite
you to provide any examples which show
that anything I have suggested is
not true. Hawking and registering domain
names is a marketing
function, with a bit of techno-bit twiddling attached;
running a registry
of who has registered what so that the DNS function
can be authoritatively
carried out is pure techno-bookkeeping, and should
never be found in the
same basket as marketing. They are philosophically
different functions
that have an inherent conflict of interest, and any mix of
them is quite
anti-competitive in that every registration then ultimately ends
up with
the registry, thereby giving that registry an unfair advantage in its
own
hawking efforts if it is permitted then to tout its own registration services
as to every conceivable variation of a "hot" name, which Verisign (and,
e.g.,
register.com, but you see register.com does not have the whole pile
as does
Verisign) does interminably. I am not an antitrust lawyer,
but I've studied
it, and I was not born yesterday.
Rumor has it that Verisign has also tracked WHOIS queries, and when one
looks like a "hot" one (read "marketable") it has immediately snatched it
up
for itself, and although this also seems to be the practice in a lot of
other places,
a look at the domain names that Verisign/NSI has registered
to itself would
make it among the biggest, if not the biggest,
cybersquatter on the net (were it
not for the loophole in the law that
exempts registrars from that law -- a
loophole about which I would like to
know -- and intend to find out -- just
how much Verisign/NSI had a hand in
getting into that abominable law.
Chuck, no one out here with half a brain can fail to figure out what
Verisign/NSI -- of whom I am forced against my will to be a customer
if I'm to have a domain name -- does. Verisign/NSI past practices have,
I suspect, conditioned a good bit of the public to accept at once the idea
that Verisign/NSI would in fact be carrying out exactly what I've said.
And thank you for the email; it has moved me to respond, and suggested
that, since this issue is before the Congress right now, I should
immediately
copy this whole thing off to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), so excuse
me
while I take care of that chore. Maybe that will help put an end to
this
farce.
Bill Lovell
"Gomes, Chuck" wrote:
Bill,Please give me an example that
proves that the current separation between Registry and Registrar does not
work.Chuck
Well,
let's hope so. To begin with, paper work "separation" between
registry and registrar
functions has always been a gross fiction -- it
never works and should never have been
contemplated. What do you think
happens when the registry type says to the registrar type,
"Let's do
lunch?" I never deal directly with NSI (Verisign) in registering a domain
name,
but only when the necessary paper work trickles out of my
registration application to some
other registrar.
Even so, I guess that makes me a "customer" of Verisign and gives them
a crack in the law
that allows them to send me their SPAM. That's one
reason why there's an incompatibility
between registry and registrar
functions -- registries should twiddle bits, and that's all --
a
registry should be hawking nothing. (For our nonUSA people to whom
the slang term
"hawking" is not familiar, it just means aggressive
marketing and that sort of thing.)
(Once our current more important issues get resolved, SPAM, privacy,
security, etc., will
be my next projects.)
(The concession in par. 2 below solves nothing as to the problem in
par. 1.)
Bill Lovell
Bruce James wrote:
""The major sticking point arose from a letter that the
Justice Department sent to the Department of Commerce warning that the
deal would harm competition in the nascent business of registering
Internet names, people familiar with the negotiations said. The letter
opposed the so-called vertical integration of VeriSign's managing of the
".com" database and registering new names in the database, sources
said.""
""Commerce officials were said to be asking for more
concessions from VeriSign, such as giving up control of the ".net"
domain sooner than 2005.""
/Bruce
----- Original Message -----
Sent: May 16, 2001 07:46
Subject: [ga] VeriSign May Ditch
Domain Deal VeriSign May Ditch
Domain Deal
By Aaron Pressman
May 15 2001 04:57 PM
PDT
The Commerce Department's review
of the agreement that extends the computer security firm's control of
the '.com' domain has the company thinking twice, sources
say.
MORE at:
http://www.thestandard.com/article/0,1902,24500,00.html
/Bruce
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|