Re: [ga] RE: Antitrust Violations: Fact versus Fiction

["Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>]

Sorry, but if you read the paper you will see that we deal with various
forms of government-derived immunity in some detail, and reject them for
good and sufficient reasons.

The people we suggest have the most risk are **registrars** and those who
make agreements with them (e.g. ICANN).  

For US anti-trust law it matters not how you characterize "the Internet",
only how you characterize various relationships among the parties, so for
this purpose we don't need to get into the deep waters you wish us to swim
in.

On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 eric@hi-tek.com wrote:

> Dear Dr. Froomkin,
> 
> I am only a mild speed reader but it would seem to me that your analysis
> misses an important point.
> 
> Concessionaires.  If indeed the US Gov can give license to a private
> enterprise to exploit a national resource such as the Internet then they
> are doing no different then when they allow lumber companies of federal
> land,  cattle ranchers of federal leased land and tour operators in
> federal parks.
> There is plethora of law in this area.  One of the keys is annual
> bidding and multiple concessionaires.
> Somewhere at sometime someone got confused and decided that this
> internet thing was different.  Probably because they were ignorant.
> 1. If it is a USG resource then it should be managed by the BLM.
> 2. If it is not a USG resource then DoC should stay the hell away from
> it as it violates international treaties to interfere with international
> rights.
> 3. ccTLDs that have it together regard their internet as a national
> resource and treat it accordingly, exploitation versus security and
> conservation being the watchwords.
> 
> So for all of your treatise you must first answer a question and make a
> statement of thesis;
> Is the Internet as we use it a USG resource or not?
> If it is not then ICANN is nonsensical
> If it is then ICANN is obliged to follow the rules of using a USG
> resource, which I own a part of.
> 
> (just another way of looking at it)
> e
> 
> "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" wrote:
> 
> > http://personal.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/icann-antitrust.pdf
> >
> > --
> >                 Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
> > A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
> > U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
> > +1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
> >                       -->It's very hot here.<--
> >
> > --
> > 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
> 
> 

-- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                      -->It's very hot here.<--

--
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