[nc-org] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] An overview of the issue [EXPIRED TRIAL LICENCE]
"I think we alll agree on the 3 points above." - No!
Dany Vandromme wrote:
> Milton Mueller wrote:
> > 1. The stakes are fairly low.
> > Dot org is not a "problem" now. There is nothing
> > about it that causes special or unique issues
> > in regards to trademarks, whois, registrars, etc.
> > Org registrants are not clamoring for new policies,
> > business/IP interests are not tormented by
> > renegade .org registrants.
If it ain't broke don't fix it!!
> > 2. Divestiture itself is half the battle.
> > The primary rationale for this whole exercise
> > was to get dot org out of Verisign's hands and
> > into someone else's hands. That is, the impetus
> > came from promoting competition. So that
> > objective is achieved merely by executing
> > the divestiture expeditiously.
I have had no problems registering with Verisign and I don't like the idea of having to
re-register with some other organization, because some-one has a political problem with
Verisign. What's the difference between one monopoly over another? I mean, $30/year isn't
alot to bitch and complain about. Once again, "If it ain't broke don't fix it!"
> > 3. Representing the noncommercial sector is the other half (or 45%?) of the battle.
> > Whatever issues remain are pretty much
> > solved (some would say only partially solved)
> > by making the new administrator of ORG
> > representative, supportive, and
> > responsive to noncommercial domain
> > name registrants. That will ensure that the
> > domain is promoted and administered in
> > the appropriate ways.
Well, my solution to this, is that I am developing ISP services aimed specifically for the
noncommercial sector! I intend to role out the services in the new year. This is one of
the reason that I have joined this group and intend to be more actively involved with
Dr. Daniel Carras
Delta R&D, Inc.
"Philosophy Incorporated: Our Product Is Thought"
Dr.Dan Iam with Green Eggs and Ham [Ref Dr. Seuss]