Re: [ga] New TLD White Paper released

["L. Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

On 19 Mar 2003 at 14:46, Karl Auerbach wrote:

> The best that ICANN can do is to be blind to rights that may or may not
> exist in names, leaving the resolution of disputes to forums better suited
> to that kind of thing.
> 
> That doesn't mean that I agree with Milton's paper - I believe that ICANN
> ought to be cranking new TLDs out at a rate of rather more than one per
> day, and that the choice of what TLD ought to be totally blind to the
> actual character string being sought (other than to ensure that it doesn't
> clash with an already allocated string.)  But Milton's approach is
> certainly a far sight better than the status quo of do-nothingness.

Karl, try to answer this for me.  Is it in the best interests of the 
economy to undermine entrepreneurial efforts by simply taking the unique 
product of small businesses and organizations by fiat?  Please tell me 
what incentive there might be for small businesses to start up if 
somewhere down the road the government will elect to just destroy them at 
will, with no recourse.  Keep in mind that requesting a Rulemaking did 
nothing more than to have DoC abrogate its responsibility and deny they 
had any such responsibility.  If DoC is the entity/agency handling or 
overseeing these takeovers, the courts are not an option.  No small 
business could survive it.  Estimated costs for going against the 
government were in excess of 1.5 million with no possibility of damages.  
Is that to be the plan?  If so, it does not bode well for anyone planning 
to go into a small business.  Why expend the money and effort just to lose 
it to a whim of DoC?  

Leah


--
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