Re: Implications of NSI *Skunkworks* Ruling

[Bob Allisat <bob@wtv.net>]

Duane Little wrote:
> You're getting deeply into the creation of your own approximation
> of trademark law right here.
> 
> What gives you the right?

Kent Crispin replied:
>> The contract signed upon issuance of the domain name.

 Under what authority was that contract
 issued? Which International Treaty
 sanctioned this process? What national
 governments supported and/or were involved
 in this the drafting of this treaty and
 contract? Answers are requested.

 Since answers have never been provided I'll
 be forced to reply for Kent. Again. The MoU
 contract has no backing authority and is
 worth as much as the paper it's written on.
 Why? Because it has *no* International Treaty
 or Trade Agreement behind it and *no* national
 governments were involved in it's creation nor
 approved it's final form. CORE's claim to
 soveriegnity in establishing any Top Level
 Domains or policy bodies is as much a sham
 as were those of the pre-reform Alternic or
 Internic. 

 Address the questions Kent or admit you are
 no more than a somewhat more civil Eugene
 (God bless his black hat and soul!). CORE
 has no more claim to control anything than
 Internic or Alternic of days fone by. Both
 these groups now realize this fact. Time for
 you and your CORE gang to do the same.

 TeleVirtually Yours,

 Bob Allisat

 Director, World TeleVirtual Network             http://www.wtv.net
 PO Box 191 St E Toronto Canada M6H 4E2                 tor@wtv.net
 (416) 534-1999                   http://www.wtv.net/portfolio.html