Re: Re[4]: [ga] FW: Urgent: questions for ICANN Board Candidates

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Sat, 8 Sep 2001 02:05:27 -0700, William X Walsh
<william@userfriendly.com> wrote:
>Saturday, Saturday, September 08, 2001, 1:31:09 AM, DPF wrote:
>

>> They only support ICANN so long as ICANN does not act against them.
>> You try to take .uk away from Nominet and give to say RIPE and you'll
>> see Tony Blair on the phone to his mate George W.
>
>UK would sign the contract.   They already have a strong relationship
>with the UK Government.  There is no reason for them not to sign the
>contract.

Actually .uk's position seems pretty close to not recognising ICANN's
authority at all.  Their position IIRC is they have a contract with
the estate of Jon Postel which ICANN can not terminate (DR Black
correct me if mis-stating).

.uk would be one of the last not the first to sign a contract.
Remember ICANN are not just wanting ccTLDs to accept re-delegations
rights but also to give unlimited policy authority to ICANN.   ICANN
could then start exempting words from registrations, impose the UDRP,
levying a tax per name, imposing structural requirements for 2nd and
3rd level names etc etc.

>> Don't think that ICANN would have a shit show in hell of surviving a
>> war with the ccTLDs as long as the major ccTLDs had their Govt onside.
>
>You assume the ccTLDs would be unified, and that their governments
>would oppose ICANN on their behalf.

I assume the major ccTLDs would be unified and their Governments would
back then if ICANN did what you suggested.  I can not speak for the NZ
Government (well not anymore :-) but on the knowledge I do have of our
local scene I would say it is a near certainty for us.

And the ccTLDs have done an amazing job of keeping unity over the last
couple of years.  

DPF
--
david@farrar.com
ICQ 29964527
--
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