Re: [ga] Geographic and Geopolitical Names in .info

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Dear Mike,
thank you to permit us to share in a so much vivid way what Staff is 
spending its time on. All this is certainly of US-centric international 
cultural fun, but I hardly see what it has to do with the ICANN's mission 
and from where ICANN would gets the necessary double authority on the 
matter (right to decide and competence to decide). The only thing we can 
say for sure is that the naming space is not the ICANN property.

This (absurd IMO) complexity - the "alphabetical" BoD Members start 
acknowledging - results from the complexity of the ICANN contract policy. 
There is a Latin legal say - Michael you probably knows - stipulating that 
no one should take advantage from its own inability to match his own 
obligations. I suggest it becomes the ICANN motto.

I just want to submit that this forum has actually overlooked two major 
questions. The USA (ISO 3166, French part: Union Sud Africaine) will have a 
good UDRP motive: who is going to have "usa.info" ??? Also who is going to 
have "eu.info" : Europe or les Etats Unis ???

I suggest we ask Louis Touton's opinion and call on some urgent advise by 
Joe Sims.
Jefsey


On 18:54 19/09/01, Mike Roberts said:
>Alexander - excellent post on a complicated topic.
>
>The tactical situation is traceable back to a continuing ambiguity about 
>the extent to which the DNS namespace is a public resource to be allocated 
>through governmental processes versus a private resource recently opened 
>to investment and commercialization.
>
>Obviously, what we have today is some of both in a fairly confused mix and 
>no well defined boundary line between the two.  In addition to the 
>confusion generated by varying national law and culture differences, there 
>are philosophical differences.  In the US, we have long had the assumption 
>that if a resource has not specifically been placed or retained under 
>government management, then it's open for private exploitation.  In many 
>parts of the world, the tradition is that resources are public unless 
>placed in the private sector.
>
>The newly elected black majority government of South Africa firmly 
>believes it is entitled to control of the name of its country in the DNS 
>namespace and it is currently litigating an existing registration in a US 
>court.  If it loses, I have no doubt that it will seek other remedies 
>through national law and international treaty. If it wins, there will be 
>an immediate effect on DNS registration policies.
>
>There are deeply felt national identity issues here, and the ICANN 
>community against developing country governments is an unequal contest, 
>especially when the counter-argument, in the view of the governments 
>concerned, is an excess of commercial greed in first world countries.
>
>So I think the challenge is to see if we cannot find a middle ground which 
>is responsive to the desires of these governments and can attract their 
>support, or at least their acquiescence, without unduly compromising the 
>flexibility and availability of domain names through private sector mechanisms.
>
>- Mike
>
>
>--
>--
>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

--
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