Re: [wg-review] The Number 1 Problem - DNDEF

[Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

Jefsey, 

I noticed you gratuitously took credit for introducing the motion for a DNDEF on *your* page www.dndef.org 

However, I just wanted to re-post my initial discussion of the topic you suddenly claim to have introduced to the List. 

The post quoted below was mailed by me to the List on Jan. 5, 2001.  I believe that this date is well before any admission by you that this was even a 
valid topic for discussion in this WG (if you have other evidence, please produce it): 

>"This having been said, let me offer up something which may help to initiate some movement in our discussion:

>Towards a definition of a domain name:

>Domain names are an addressing schema akin to a telephone number or IP string.  The only difference between a telephone#/ip address and a domain 
>name is that the syntax of the latter is composed of linguistic characters as opposed to numerals.  One of the most primary (for many THE most primary) 
>issue(s) of contention with regards to domain names is the to-date de facto conflation of domains with trademarks.  Unless they are coined words or fall 
>within the purview of an sTLD schema, I fail to see why TLDs should be considered cognates of trademarks.  For, just as nobody can claim to own a 
>telephone number except the phone company which provides the service, a domain name is a public service offered in the most equitable fashion 
>imaginable: first come, first served."

I take exception to your rather late claim to having "introduced" this motion to the WG.  The facts are the facts, let's not try to mislead and misdirect.

Thank You.

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
          Hermes Network, Inc.






--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html