Re: [ga-roots] How the sky might fall

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

WXW and all,

William X. Walsh wrote:

> Hello Patrick,
>
> Tuesday, June 05, 2001, 9:06:03 AM, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, William X. Walsh wrote:
>
> >> Hello Jefsey,
> >>
> >> Tuesday, June 05, 2001, 4:29:17 AM, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> >> > All boils down to Mike Roberts'  K$ 50. Would the iCANN have
> >> > carry its job as a per a decent reading of the WhitePaper/ByLaws
> >> > getting sponsoring as an educational, research or charity service
> >> > to the community and made TLD registration paid at cost ($ 20
> >> > as documented by the Linux community) it would financially
> >> > flourish and none of the current problems would exist.
> >>
> >> If you want to have any credibility to your arguments, Jefsey, you
> >> have to at least make an effort to be realistic.
> >>
> >> Personally, I don't find the $50,000 application fee to be as
> >> excessive as others have.
> >>
> >> But a minimum set of both business, financial, and technical standards
> >> must exist, and before granting the application, those issues must be
> >> reviewed, investigated, followed up on, etc.
>
> > I have to disagree with this. ICANN was set up to be a *technical
> > coordination* body, not the decider of business models and financial
> > capabilities.
>
> But, both of those things have a direct and potentially major effect
> on the technical issues.
>
> > What is necessary in order to excute on that mandate is
> > effective escrow. Effective escrow of data would limit the exposure to an
> > interruption of service that a business failure might cause, while keeping
> > ICANN out of peoples bank accounts and business plans areas which they
> > have no business being in.
>
> That alone is not sufficient.
>
> I'd add another requirement.  A mandatory $100,000 bond that could be
> used to contract with a third party for the operation of the TLD
> Registry should the registry operator be unwilling or unable (for
> whatever reason) to continue operating the registry.

  This is a good idea if you can define what the bond is to specifically
be use for.  If not than it would be difficult to justify it.

>
>
> A mandatory clause that will assign all rights to ICANN for
> reassignment to the data and all other "intellectual and other
> property" which may be required to continue the stable continued
> operation of the registry.

  As ICANN is a non-profit company I don't believe this would be
legal and certainly not appropriate.

>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh
> mailto:william@userfriendly.com
> Owner, Userfriendly.com
> Userfriendly.com Domains
> The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


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