[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [wg-c] Motion to Postpone
I followed these negotiations very closely, as an outside observer, since we
are a competitive registrar in waiting, ( :-); I was pleasantly surprised by
many points, and we are analyzing it thoroughly, of course. But there are
some significant and unexpected changes which do seem useful to analyze for
the purposes of this group's work.
From: John Charles Broomfield [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 10:33 AM
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
Subject: Re: [wg-c] Motion to Postpone
> At 07:59 PM 9/28/1999 , Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
> >This couldn't be further from the truth. The fact remains that this
> >represents a significant change to the current landscape. Further, it was
> >quite unexpected given recent events. Time must be taken in order to
> >evaluate the relevance of these events and how they might, or might not,
> >affect our position and statements.
> In fact short of NSI pursuing a frivolous lawsuit, in the hope of getting
> sympathetic judge, the announced arrangement has always seemed the most
> likely, starting all the way back to almost 3 years ago.
I think I agree with you that it is the most likely outcome.
However, as there are so many TLD-owner-wanabees out there, the whole
process has dragged along like crazy. Now it is quite clear (at least to me)
that TLDs are *not* going to be "given away". As we now have a distinct
position on that, it would seem that we CAN finally move forward.
Yours, John Broomfield.