Re: [ga-icann] interesting California law to consider
Saturday, June 16, 2001, 2:18:11 AM, NameCritic wrote:
> That's like saying that I'm stopping you from doing business because I
> already own the property you want. A ridiculous comment. They are stifling
> business by not allowing ICANN to duplicate their business? What color is
> the sky in your world Dassa.
That's like claiming McDonalds should be permitted to get all burger
fast food chains to close down because they are duplicating their
It is not a duplication. There is no .biz in the ICANN root, and the
ICANN .biz does not have to appear in the privately run alt.root
namespaces. Both stores can sell burgers, and fries and shakes and
> ICANN is utilizing unfair business practices by taking advantage of the lead
> they have in a particular industry to put others out of business in order to
> create less competition and by claiming the ONE TRUE AUTHORITATIVE ROOT
ICANN has not done anything to enforce any policy that would prohibit
alternative roots from being run. They are not putting them out of
business at all.
(For that matter, the alt.root operators themselves seem to
think that root systems are not businesses, so how can they be put out
of business when they claim they are not in it?)
> PS: It's not a good practice to post drivel on the mailing list either.
Watch the personal attacks, Chris. Don't make me sic Corliss on ya.
William X Walsh <email@example.com>
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-icann" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html