[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[comments-gtlds] Not quite accurate...
- To: <email@example.com>
- Subject: [comments-gtlds] Not quite accurate...
- From: "Jim Fleming" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 09:35:12 -0500
- Cc: <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <chicoinc@PeperMartin.com>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <Theresa.Swinehart@wcom.com>, <email@example.com>, <Ted_Shapiro@mpaa.org>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
"NSi was told in the first meeting of the Names Council (june 12th) that
they could only have one representative, and that if they had a problem
with that, they should talk to the ICANN Board, not to us. Now ICANN has
decided that they can have three until the bylaws are changed, which will
I think a more accurate history is that a rather reasonable
group of people were suggested, apparently by NSI. Those
people were Don Telage, Richard Sexton and Joop Teernstra.
All three of these people are world class experts and would
have been too much for the novices on the ICANN Board.
ICANN apparently used some technicalities to prevent
Richard Sexton and Joop Teernstra from being "seated".
(BTW...why they would want to do that is beyond me)
This appeared to be an ICANN attempt to stand toe-to-toe
with NSI, which is absurd. ICANN needs NSI and they know it.
Correspondence with Network Solutions, Inc., on gTLD Constituency Group
representation on the DNSO Names Council
Letter from Mike Roberts to Jim Rutt (July 9, 1999)
Letter from Jim Rutt to ICANN (July 1, 1999)
Letter from Mike Roberts to Don Telage (June 11, 1999)
Letter from Don Telage to ICANN (June 11, 1999)
NSI then countered with two attorneys. Apparently, ICANN
realized that these people will not be a challenge to the
ICANN Board and ICANN accepted them as shown here...
Provisional Names Council members elected by the "gtld" Constituency
NorthA (.us) - Don Telage email@example.com
NorthA (.us) - David R. Johnson firstname.lastname@example.org
NorthA (.us) - Phil Sbarbaro email@example.com
In my opinion, the infamous "Internet Community" is the
big loser here. All of these tactics just show that ICANN is
going to assert its U.S. Government authority and NSI is
also and one or the other will back down, especially when
there is no financial impact. In my opinion, all of this is just
a smoke-screen while the real decisions are being made
behind the scenes.
Also, in the end, ICANN has been structured to have 3 parts,
PSO, ASO and DSO. In my opinion, the DSO will be out-voted
at every turn by the PSO and ASO which will each have
vested financial interests in supporting each other. The
clueless ICANN Board can sit in the middle and claim that
this is all democracy at work...unfortunately, it is the same
style of "democracy" that people suffered under in the
Jon Postel regime. This should not be surprising, Jon Postel
and his ITAG designed the ICANN structure.