Re: gTLD-MoU Related News (August 19, 1997)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Andi,

  I think you have in a long winded way summed it up pretty good.

  The short version is, "It is in the fine print".  >;)

andi payn wrote:
> 
> >>cases of fraud is in the CORE-MoU, or only the gtld-MoU. If the statement
> in
> >>the FAQ is true (that you can be a registrar without signing the gtld-MoU,
> >>as long as you don't care about nominating people to PAB and so forth),
> and
> >>if the objectionable points are in the gtld-MoU only, then this is a
> >>definite improvement.
> >>
> >>In other words, the gtld-MoU is still the document in force, but you don't
> >>have to agree to it to play their game, as long as all you want to do is
> >>operate as a registrar and/or join CORE, and the lesser document that you
> do
> >
> >All said and speculated, would you agree to soemthing that gioves an
> >"external" body the power to control you without any financial or
> >directorial capacity?
> 
> That's my point. I would only consider signing (but probably wouldn't
> anyway...) if I didn't have to agree to the more extreme stipulations, such
> as the stipulation that I can't sue even if I'm defrauded, or that I can't
> get my money back if I never become a registrar.
> 
> >From what I remember, the gtld-MoU contains these stipulations, and
> therefore I would never sign them. On the other hand, from what I remember,
> the CORE-MoU does not contain the protection-from-normal-redress clauses and
> even explicitly states that my money (or at least 90%) will be returned if I
> am not accepted. Therefore, I might consider signing the CORE-MoU. And from
> what I learned today (assuming the FAQ is honest), that's all I'd have to do
> to apply to or become a registrar and/or a member of CORE.
> 
> This makes a big difference. If I can become a registrar without giving up
> my right to sue or to follow other normal remedies, that's a hell of a lot
> better than a system where I have to give up everything.
> 
> However, I doubt the FAQ is authoritative, so I'd like to see the actual
> documents they want people to sign to see whether it's true that I don't
> need to sign the gtld-MoU. I'd also like to look at the CORE-MoU again to
> see if my memory (which is even less authoritative than a FAQ) is correct.
> 
> Unfortunately, I can't get to their web site. My ISP claims that it can't
> resolve the domain name.
> 
> Seriously.
> 
> >Plese let me know what your investigation results.  I'd be keen to see how
> >much power the gTLD has over CORE Registries.  I think the answer might
> >suprise people, although I did say this before.
> 
> CORE was charged with creating their own MoU that deals with more specific
> issues related to actually functioning as a registrar. The original
> understanding was that registrars would have to sign both MoUs. This would
> allow the I-groups to have considerable indirect control over CORE because
> all CORE members, now and forever, would have to sign the gtld-MoU before
> they could participate. If a company/person can become a registrar and even
> join CORE without signing anything but the CORE-MoU, this is a major step
> forward.
> 
> As I've said before, at this rate, the system will be looking good by 2006
> or so...
> 
> So what are we going to do until then?

Regards,
-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. IEG. INC. 
Phone :913-294-2375 (v-office)
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com