RE: FW: [wg-review] [DNDEF] short quizz 9,10

["Joanna Lane" <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-wg-review@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-review@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Miles B. Whitener
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 4:37 PM
To: Kent Crispin; wg-review@dnso.org
Subject: Re: FW: [wg-review] [DNDEF] short quizz 9,10


> On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 02:37:24PM -0500, Joanna Lane wrote:
> > Eric Dierker wrote:-
> > The point is we do not need the UDRP.  The courts are better
at it.
> >
> > Now with that said, the courts may want the UDRP to lessen
their work
> > load.>
> >
> >
> > And to handle small claims. Not everybody has 100K to
gamble...:-)
>
> And to deal with the fact that a court case across national
boundaries
> with different languages may be a very very complex affair...

>But it is anyway.  Why are DNS names such a special case?
I am sure you can come up with reasons.  But the fact is that
they aren't any more special legally than any other kind of
unique names.>

Oh yes they are different. If you have two conflicting and equally worthy
claimants operating in different territories,
it's perfectly legal for both to continue trading using the same name. This
doesn't fit with the concept of a single root zone.
You are trying to have your cake and eat it. Either you have to unpick the
agreement to use only one root zone,
or you have to put international guidelines in place to facilitate the
amicable resolution of disputes at minimal cost
to the small players.  Currently that's called UDRP.
I wonder how many more times I will have to make this same point. <sigh>

It seems that some want to endow DNS management with a kind of
>psuedo-governmental status, and a global one at that.

Some don't want to endow DNS management with anything. Some want DNS
Management to see their situation for what it really is.

>
> In any case, the question of whether we need a UDRP has already
been
> settled -- we do.  The question is how to make it better.

>Not everybody agrees with this.

Maybe these people solve every problem by passing the buck.


--
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

--
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