Re: "Internet Names *and* Addresses"

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

Tony and all,

Tony Rutkowski wrote:

> Jeff,
>
> >> >by, as long as it's done lawfully, has minimal liabilities, and is
> >> >widely accepted within the industry.
>
> >Swiss law or protection under Swiss law, and unlike the MoU, which is
> >attempting to hid behind a Swiss corprate legal barrier, the GP does not
> >perpose this.  But is attempting to provide some protection on libilities, of
> >a much less perportion than the MoU seeks undes Swiss law.
>
> Thanks for highlighting the distinctions here.  Ira explains
> this well to public gatherings.  His intention is to achieve
> minimal liability - not by creating a quickie cartel under
> Swiss Law - but by carefully and lawfully constructing the
> organization under U.S. law, paying careful attention to
> organizational balance, due process requirements, and other
> features.  This should make the organization more acceptable
> to industry and users by leaving some exposure to legal norms
> and judicial process of the U.S. in the areas of antitrust,
> First Amendment guarantees, privacy, and tort.  If people
> start playing egregious games within the body, relief can be
> provided judicially.

  Than you Tony for noticing.  I felt that it was important to point put these
subtal diffrences to which the diffrent perposals (GP and MoU), and length
to which legal immunity from Stake holders and others in the internet community
are willing to go.  It is indeed intresting to see how quickly that those on the
MoU bandwagon are so intrested in this point, isn't it?  >;)  DO I hear the
pot calling the kettel black here?

>
>
> --tony

 Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com