RE: AGN-DNS EARTH/USA Registry Terms and Conditions FIRST DRAFT

[Adrian Cooper <apc@enterprise.net>]

This is substantially true  - but it seems to me that the distinction between "experimental" and "actual" is becoming increasingly compromised.

The "alternative" TLD (aTLD's?) have been working under the assumption IMO that once the IANA process was implemented they would as a de-facto right be awarded the charter for the official corresponding iTLD's.  I for one believe that they have been existing under a rather large misaprehension here.

All of the rhetoric we are seeing from the aTLD's is IMO an attempt to lend credibility to their aTLD's and their actions in defending the integrity of same.

If this folly is allowed to continue we could all easily implement "experimental" TLD's as a pre-emptive claim on the ultimate official corresponding iTLD's, but which I repeat would make a mockery of the entire IAHC process and cannot be allowed to happen both in this case, and from the point of view of precedent.

Adrian.


----------
From: 	Vince Wolodkin
Sent: 	26 November 1996 22:53
To: 	Adrian Cooper
Cc: 	iahc-discuss@iahc.org; 'John Palmer'
Subject: 	Re: AGN-DNS EARTH/USA Registry Terms and Conditions FIRST DRAFT

If I am not mistaken, providers such as AGN and Alternic have
consistently stated that their offerings are experimental in nature, and
no promise was made for the continued existence of the unsanctioned
iTLDs.  Therefore, domain holders would be - presumably - forewarned.

Vince

Adrian Cooper wrote:
> 
> This still does not alter the fact that you are endeavouring to pre-empt and subvert the objectives and procedures of IAHC.
> 
> How can the committee possibly be seen to grant a domain to an organisation that has cynically acted autonomously in claiming and using a TLD name that has not been granted in due process, and apparently will continue to do so regardless of the outcome of the IAHC deliberations. If this unacceptable (and farcical) situation was given any sort of credence whatsoever by IAHC or any other organisation, we might as well all just get on with selecting and using whatever TLD names we wanted right now
> 
> I am sure that neither IAHC or anyone else will seek to prevent your activities with your assumed TLD names, but you had better accept the fact that they will only be of significance (as related to AGN ) to a diminutive fraction of the global Internet, while those that are ultimately awarded these domains in due IAHC process will have complete root server authority, and therefore total accessibility and recognition by the global Internet.
> 
> When are you and your like minded minority going to eventually realise that subverting the process by failing to recognise the role and importance of IAHC, and further making all manner of insubstantial claims and threats which are totally irrelevant without the authority of IANA and the root servers that the real Internet uses, is not only a complete and utter waste this groups time, and further is not making any sort of  positive contribution to the substantive issues under discussion.
> 
> Adrian.
> 
> 
> 
> ----------
> From:   John Palmer
> Sent:   26 November 1996 18:19
> To:     iahc-discuss@iahc.org
> Subject:        Re: AGN-DNS EARTH/USA Registry Terms and Conditions FIRST DRAFT
> 
>    3> AGN has been developing USA for a year now and has many people
>       registered under that domain. You would be disrupting many web
>       sites, hosts and e-mail sites
>    4> In the United States, the government would not be able to
>       restrict usage because we have FCFS trademark laws and also
>       the 1st amendment.
>    5> AGN has developed a plan to make USA useful for both those who
>       want structure (ie: domain.state.usa, domain.city.state.usa)
>       and those who want a freeform domain (ie: Something.USA). This
>       sets us apart from the .US top level domain which is too
>       strict as it only allows geographical registrations.
> 
>    AGN will continue to develope USA and hopes that the committee will not
> make any decision which will disrupt several hundred sites already using
> USA.
> 
>    John Palmer
> 
>