RE: [wg-review] (Charter) Has everyone read the ICANN Name.Space charter?

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

Why are you insisting that Gene defend NameSpace? He has nothing to do with
them. 

> From: Sotiropoulos [mailto:sotiris@hermesnetwork.com]
> Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 1:57 AM

> 12/31/00 2:53:14 AM, "Marsh, Miles (Gene)" <MarshM@diebold.com> wrote:
> 
> >Oh, please stop.  This was part of the Name.space 
> application.  If you are just now reading this, you 
> are way out of touch with the issues.
> >
> >Gene...
> 
> 
> Alright Gene, let me put it this way:  Keeping in mind that 
> this was part of the application for the listed 
> TLDs, would you care to comment on the opening statements in 
> the Name.Space charter namely:
> 
> "The toplevel global internet namespace is a global commons."
> 
> That is certainly a rather sweeping statement.  Where did 
> they ever get such an idea?

Where do you, or anyone else, get theirs? Paul Garrin is a very creative
guy. No one has to tell him what to write. He is also an independent
so-and-so, as we all saw in MDR.


> Is it any surprise that none of the Name.Space TLDs were approved?

Even among the other RSCs, Name-Space is a pariah. Simply, they don't play
well with others.

> Let's discuss the break-up option, as it appears to be a very 
> real possibility on the horizon.  Are we 
> back to national or continental zones of influence?  What 
> about COM, NET, ORG in such a scenario?  

Considering, that ICANN is specifically a California Corporation. No court
in Australia has authority to break-up a CA corp, doing lawful business, in
California. The whole thing is a red herring.