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

["andi payn" <payn@null.net>]

David Maher (chair, iPOC):
>>Would it be possible to send this myth to a well deserved perpetual rest?
>>There was NEVER any requirement that registrars sign the gTLD-MoU.
>

Adam Todd:
>The only problem I see with that is the gTLD-MoU sictates what the
>Registrars are capable of doing.
>
>The gTLD-MoU seems to exist in so many modified forms it's unclear as to
>what the AGREEMENT between all parties is, besides accepting the name of
>the document.

As far as I know, there's only one form of the gTLD-MoU. The IAHC draft, the
CORE-MoU, and the registrar application may be similar in many ways, but
they're not other forms of the same thing. This is confusing at times, but
it's not too hard to figure it out by reading all of the documents. The
important thing, as you yourself pointed out, is to read (with an attorney)
all of the documents that you yourself will be asked to sign before paying
any money. It sounds like that complete lists of documents is the
application and the CORE-MoU. If that's right, you won't be bound by the
terms of the gTLD-MoU.

CORE as a whole may be bound by the terms of the gTLD-MoU as well as by the
terms of its contracts with each of its members (assuming that that's who
the CORE-MoU is between?), and I suppose it'd be up to CORE and to Swiss law
and courts to interpret any conflicts between these obligations...

Adam Todd again:
>The CORE-MoU need gTLD=MoU to exist, so there has to be a close connection
>somewhere.

There clearly is a close connection: the gTLD-MoU, among other things,
creates CORE and provides it with an explicit mission, explicit powers, and
other guidelines. The CORE-MoU defines the obligations of each member of
CORE. I don't think this gives anyone the power to enforce provisions of the
gTLD against individual members of CORE who didn't sign the gTLD-MoU. It
probably does give iPOC (and, later, POC) the power to enforce the
provisions of the gTLD against CORE as a whole. At the most extreme, they
could dissolve CORE and force all registrars to either join a new system or
be left out. Actually, this may be all they could do, and most likely they
wouldn't do that, because it would leave them with nothing...

Adam Todd (again):
>How can someone sign an agreement to CORE-MoU if they don't agree with
>gTLD-MoU? They go hand in hand in my opinion.

You'd have to agree with the gTLD-MoU in principle, but you wouldn't have to
agree to it legally. There's an important distinction.

As I've said before, I think you're trying to exaggerate the flaws in their
system, and I think they're apparent enough without you doing that. I've
come to this discussion with an open mind, and I've seen enough wrong with
the IAHC-based system that I wouldn't join it, but it would have been easier
for me to reach that conclusion if both sides had laid out the plain facts.
I think that if you're completely open and honest about what's wrong with
the IAHC system, people will see that you're right much more quickly than if
you distort and exaggerate.

That doesn't mean that people will agree with your solution, but at least
they'll see it in a better light.