Re: Reasoned debate requires reasonable statements

[Bob Helfant <bhelfant@globecomm.net>]

It is absolutely proper that a body in charge be accountable and
responsible for it's actions.  I sincerely hope that POC, CORE and PAB agree.

At 03:09 PM 7/28/97 -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 28, 1997 at 03:15:46PM -0500, Chris Clough wrote:
>> A common misperception may have been interpreted from your post: 
>> In fact, NSF sponsorship _never_ protected NSI from legal
>> liability. Network Solutions has born all the risks and expense
>> for its InterNIC operations.
>
>I hope people people don't take that interpretation.  I said that NSF
>was relatively immune, not NSI, and I was addressing the legal
>liability of the oversight body, not the registrar. 
>
>> Crispin wrote:
>> > The primary power NSF really brought to the scene is limitation
>> of 
>> > legal liability -- as a government agency they are relatively
>> immune 
>> > from suit.  Any group that steps in is considerably weaker in
>> this 
>> > regard.  Certainly the IANA is not immune to suit, nor are the
>> root 
>> > operators, nor are Jon Postel or Paul Vixie or any of a host of
>> other 
>> > players.  [Whether such suits would win is a totally different 
>> > question, of course.]
>> > 
>
>-- 
>Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
>kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
>PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
>http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html
>
>