[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[comments-wgb] .Web

Actually, there is an explanation for the numerous .web
registrars: the IAHC, in its power grab, felt that .web
would make an excellent TLD. Thankfully, their grab
failed. Unfortunately, their resultant company, CORE,
still feels that it owns .web. As a result, Image Online
Design, The .Web Registry, filed suit against CORE
this past November. That suit is ongoing, CORE's motion
to dismiss having been denied.

Image Online Design was given the directive to go active
on 31 July, 1996, by IANA. While many dispute this, the
plain fact is that IANA has never denied that, at a meeting
in Marina Del Rey, California, at their offices, Bill
Manning and Jon Postel indicated that they wanted to
see "running code" and advised Image Online Design to
activate the registry. When directly questioned, Bill
Manning, after consulting with Jon Postel, gave IANA's
permission to also collect registration fees to pay for
the registry.

If anyone feels that this is not true, I will gladly
accept a statement from Bill Manning showing same. Absent
that (and due to the unfortunate and untimely death of
Jon Postel), this issue remains as is. Every single
individual who was at that meeting who has spoken up
has backed Image Online Design's position.

So the bottom line is that IOD continues to operate
the .web registry, in the absence of any indication
that it should cease. Neither IANA nor ICANN has given
any indication one way or the other.

If there are trademark issues, I urge those who feel
that they have been infringed upon to file a lawsuit
against the infringers. IOD will gladly comply with
any court order with proper jurisdiction.

If compliance with the UDRP is a condition of entry
into the roots, I don't see a problem there, either.

Our position on the "Sunrise" proposal has been
published, so I won't go into detail other than to
point that out.

If anyone has any questions or concerns, I welcome
your email.

Christopher Ambler