[registrars] .ORG NC Task Force
Ken:
Why
was there not overwhelming support for that statement, who was against it and
who supported it.
Section 5.1.2 of the .org agreement ( http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-org-25may01.htm)
states rather clearly "Registry TLD
and neither it nor any affiliated entity will be eligible to seek to continue to
operate the Registry TLD."
Now thinking
outside of the box our friends at VRSN if they decided to participate in .ORG
would possibly try a combination of the following tactics: (1) Under Section
5.12 VeriSign can be a sub-contractor for up to 80% of the value of the Registry
contract, i.e. non-profit entity, backed by VeriSign registry and/or (2)
non-profit entity backed by either eNIC (.cc TLD operator) or dotTV (.tv TLD
operator) registries which were recently acquired by
VeriSign.
Unlike
in the past where we have been reactive, this constituency should proactively
protect the spirit and letter of the .ORG agreements.
Anyone
willing to serve on this Registrar Task Force as proposed in the 2002 Registrar
Agenda that does not have a conflict of interest please let me
know.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Ken Stubbs Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:37 PM To: Registrars@dnso.org Subject: [registrars] additional BC comment on the "org" re-delegation
|