[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [wg-c] my position paper v. 1.1

To: <weinberg@mail.msen.com>
Subject: RE: [wg-c] my position paper v. 1.1
From: "A.M. Rutkowski" <amr@netmagic.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 08:05:35 -0400
Cc: <wg-c@dnso.org>
In-Reply-To: <005501bf1adb$2f80bf70$ecaf6cc7@lvrmr.mhsc.com>
References: <4.2.0.58.19991018084217.00a2bb60@shell2.bayarea.net>
Sender: owner-wg-c@dnso.org

At 05:12 AM 10/20/99 , Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
>Just in case no one noticed, the hawk is flying again.

Jon's treatment is neutral and balanced on this key
consideration - both from a substantive and legal
standpoint.  It also parallels similar neutral
treatment of the Federal Trade Commission staff
filing in the NTIA proceeding.

While there are obviously people with strong religious
views on this subject like Crocker's - and indeed in
the other direction my own personal views which are
strongly opposed to monopoly non-profit organizations
engaging in market manipulative activities - it is
essential in Jon's treatment to maintain balanced.
It is also essential to ICANN to survive a reversal
of fortune in any potential litigation.

References:
- Re: [wg-c] my position paper v. 1.1
  - From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
- RE: [wg-c] my position paper v. 1.1
  - From: "Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>

Prev by Date: RE: [wg-c] my position paper v. 1.1
Next by Date: Re: [wg-c] WGC Position Paper
Prev by thread: RE: [wg-c] my position paper v. 1.1
Next by thread: RE: [wg-c] my position paper v. 1.1
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread