FW: Re: [ga-sys] Registrants Charter - FREEDOMS - Part 1
- To: <email@example.com>
- Subject: FW: Re: [ga-sys] Registrants Charter - FREEDOMS - Part 1
- From: Joanna Lane <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 22:12:47 -0400
- In-Reply-To: <B728A957.email@example.com>
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
- User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
on 5/16/01 9:17 PM, William X. Walsh at email@example.com wrote:
> Hello Joanna,
> Wednesday, May 16, 2001, 5:06:27 PM, Joanna Lane wrote:
>> You're missing the point. Not only can I can register any number of Domains
>> with any Registrar anywhere, then sue them if they post my contact details
>> to WHOIS
> You can't sue me under those laws, Joanna.
I have no intention of suing anybody....:-) but if you set foot in Europe,
you are in the jurisdiction and can be served. Stockholm, for example, would
be an impossible for you to attend.
This is the age of globalization and by nature, it require companies to
follow policies that allow expansion into foreign markets. Also, it's
expensive for companies to have different operations for different
territories and given that there is no gaurantee that other territories will
not follow suit in the future, it makes sense to comply with the EU and
apply across the board. From the EU perspective, you can expect companies
that do not comply to be blacklisted. You may not care, but others do, and
global compliance has already started.
And the contract you
> agreed to when you registered those domains specifically permits the
> inclusion of that information in the publicly available whois servers.
The contract is onerous and was not entered into voluntarily. It can be
>> , but also, what makes you think ICANN has the power to refuse to do
>> business with European Registries and Registrars? The contracts to which you
>> refer will be changed from time to time as necessary in this evolutionary
> ICANN is a private corporation. If those companies are unable to
> comply with these provisions of those contracts, which are widely
> supported as mandatory provisions, then it has EVERY right to refuse
> to enter into a contract with them as a result of their inability or
> refusal to comply with these mandatory terms.
Agreed, but widely supported by insignificant people in the scheme of
things. ICANN will be history if they don't comply with this law. The GAC is
not a paper tiger, it has teeth and the EU has strong representation in
Washington. ICANN has no reason to fight a battle they didn't create. They
have everything to lose by refusal to comply and nothing to gain from a
>> Do you think Microsoft caved in because they were feeling compassionate?
> MS didn't cave in. MS has offices based in the EU, and has a business
> presence there. It has no choice but to comply.
They caved in by agreeing to apply it across the board, which they didn't
have to do, according to you.
> A US corporation that has no such physical presence is not bound to
> follow these silly and unnecessary laws
Silly and unecessary? I recommend you read "Brave New World". It was
compulsory High School text for me. I'm proud of the EU for leading the
world on this, as I'm proud of Britain for standing up and refusing to allow
GM food crops. These are marketing ploys by big business.
I don't expect to change your mind and I'm happy to agree to disagree...:-)
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-sys" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html