RE: [ga] WLS

["Jeff Field" <jfield@aaaq.com>]

Far more important to protect end users than speculators in domain names?
That's just plain silly and unworkable.

For example, so called "end user's" could probably be divided into numerous
sub-groups, i.e. end users that only use the domain name for email, end
user's that set up websites for ecommerce, end user's that set up
informational-only websites, end-user's that set up personal portals, end
user's that are white, black, Canadian, French...well, you get the idea.

For "speculator's" you have, speculator's that register hundreds
(thousands?) of names and do this for a full-time occupation, speculator's
that register a handful of names and do this for a hobby, speculator's that
infringe trademarks or other intellectual property, speculator's that don't
infringe on anyone's trademarks or other intellectual property.

I personally have some registered domains that I use in business (ecommerce)
and some that are for personal use, and some that I registered with the
intentions of using in business but have never gotten around to doing so.
In that regard, if someone comes along and offers my money for some of the
domains I'm not currently using, they'd probably find a receptive seller.
How am I to be classified?  An end user?  A speculator?  An end user in this
domain but a speculator in that domain?

I don't believe it's up to ICANN to separate registrants into arbitrary
groups and then decide which groups they'd like to protect or at what level
of protection each group deserves.  When you buy or sell a stock, nobody
asks whether or not the other side of the trade is a speculator or an
investor.  And, when it comes to shareholder rights, both speculators and
investors generally share the same rights.

No, it isn't for ICANN to make rules for different classes of registrants.
As far as ICANN should be concerned, a registrant is a registrant, period!
(Uhhh, that is, unless you perceive ICANN to be a governance body instead of
a technical one?  Do you?)

Of course, that's just my opinion.  I could be wrong.

Best regards,

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Love [mailto:james.love@cptech.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 10:48 AM
> To: jfield@aaaq.com
> Cc: ga@dnso.org; Kent Crispi
> Subject: Re: [ga] WLS
>
>
> I agree with Kent on this.   There is a difference between end users and
> speculators, and it is far more important to protect end users than
> speculators in domain names.
>
>    Jamie
>
> Jeff Field wrote:
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Kent
> >>Crispin
> >>Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 12:27 AM
> >>To: ga@dnso.org
> >>Subject: Re: [ga] WLS
> >>
> >>
> >>On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 08:40:23PM -0400, John Berryhill wrote:
> >>
> >>>>Dramatically increase the cost for whom?  Registrars, speculators? or
> >>>>consumers?
> >>>>
> >>>>Chuck
> >>>
> >>>Please provide a meaningful distinction between a "speculator" and a
> >>>"consumer".
> >>
> >>Speculators register domain names for the primary intent of reselling
> >>them later for a profit.  Consumers don't have resale as a primary
> >>intent.  As you know, the law is quite capable of using intent as a
> >>meaningful distinguishing characteristic.  In general, you are making a
> >>"slippery slope" argument, and, again, as you know, slippery slope
> >>arguments are not valid.
> >>
> >>--
> >>Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
> >>kent@songbird.com                          lonesome."  -- Mark Twain
> >>
> >
> >
> > In the stock market you have some people that buy and sell stocks as an
> > investment and others that buy and sell stocks on pure speculation.  The
> > first group are called, "investors"; the second group,
> "speculators".  But
> > investors and speculators are simply subsets of the more broad terms,
> > "buyers" and "sellers".
> >
> > In regards to domain names, IMHO, *way* too much emphasis has
> been placed on
> > trying to make the distinction between a "consumer" and a "speculator".
> > Both are simply members of the more broad term, "registrant".  The basic
> > question that needs answering regarding WLS is whether or not
> "registrants"
> > will be harmed.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > --
> > jeff field
> > 952-848-7626
> > 952-848-7627 fax
> > jfield@aaaq.com <mailto:jfield@aaaq.com>
> > -----
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ------
> James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
> http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love@cptech.org
> voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040
>
>
>

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