[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ISPs as stakeholders
- Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 15:20:19 -0500
- From: Dave Crocker / IMC <dcrocker@imc.org>
- Subject: Re: ISPs as stakeholders
At 07:07 PM 12/10/97 +0000, Jim Dixon wrote:
>Dave, give us a break. Really. You suggested that a move from California
>to Virginia was on a par with a move from the US to Switzerland. I
Jim, perhaps you have heard that legal analysis and decision-making pay
some attention to precedent.
The move from CA to VA was a change in legal jurisdiction and was done
without consulting the installed base of users. That is exactly what would
be done in the planned move of registry from VA to Switzerland. The degree
of autonomy between states is considerable. The change in geographic venue
was consideerable. The users were not consulted about the change. In
other words, all of the salient legal features of the previous change match
the one being planned for the current one.
Other factors make this case stronger but you are unwilling to apply even
basic legal models, so the rest of the subtleties are hardly worth pursuing.
>Those Americans love to sue one another. Why are you jacking up their
>legal bills? Why are you exporting all of these legal disputes to Europe?
They are NOT all being exported for all disputes. Not even close. The many
and major factual errors in your assertion have been explained to you and
others many times, so we again have a clear indication that you do not want
to be distracted by the facts.
>Notice that Dave considers a claim that a question has been answered at
>some point in the past equivalent to answering the question. Bizarre.
By gosh you are right. It is much more reasonable for you to succeed in a
denial of service attack, whereby you and others can clog the discussions
and prevent legitimate consideration of new topics, by constantly raising
the same old stale questions and, somehow, claim that we are expected to
take them seriously and answer them carefully each time. Clearly it is
unreasonable to, instead, expect you to consult the archives and find the
multiple occurrences of the responses. Silly of me to think that you
should actually have to do some work, rather than your demanding the work
from others.
d/
--------------------
Dave Crocker dcrocker@imc.org
Internet Mail Consortium +1 408 246 8253
675 Spruce Dr. fax: +1 408 249 6205
Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA info@imc.org , http://www.imc.org