Re: Are There Other TLD Lists?

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

Robert and all,

Robert Shaw wrote:

> Jay Fenello wrote:
> >
> > At 03:40 PM 5/21/98 EDT, CraigSimon wrote:
> > >Bill,
> > >
> > >Welcome to the list. I see Dave has already provided a link to the GP. Feel
> > >free to check out a page I've put together at
> > >http://www.flywheel.com/ircw/overview.html which includes a number of related
> > >links. I started it to keep track of the players (I'm doing a doctoral
> > >dissertation related to this topic). That page has grown kind of unwieldy, so
> > >I'll probably start thinking about reorganizing before long.
> > >
> > Hi Craig,
> >
> > Please add Iperdome to your Anti-Mou Lobby links.
>
> [why not jump into the fray, it's a quiet evening...]
>
> Hi, gtld-discussers, welcome to the world of politics...

  And you have just read one ne of its main #2 "Spin Doctors", Bob Shaw.

  Known to spam on a regular basis.  Bum virginia slim cigarettes, and mess
up web pages of regular occurrences.

>
>
> Yes, please add Jay Fenello, President of Iperdome to the anti-MoU
> list.
>
> I'll also make the following remarks about the Anti-MoU lobby
> listed at http://www.flywheel.com/ircw/overview.html#Anti-Mou
>
> 1. World Internet Association (Tony Rutkowski)
> 2. Internet Law and Policy Forum  (Tony Rutkowski)
> 3. Association for Interactive Media (Andy Sernovitz)
> 4. Washington Web: Internet Policy Forum(Andy Sernovitz)
> 5. Domain Name Rights Coalition (Mikki Barry, Milton Mueller)
> 6. Global Sense (Ken Freed)
> 7. Network Solutions, Inc.
> 8. Interactive Services Association (ISA)
>
> 1. World Internet Association (Tony Rutkowski): To my knowledge,
> there is no such thing as the illustrious-sounding World Internetworking
> Alliance (www.wia.org). These are just Tony Rutkowski's personal web
> pages. If anyone believes differently, I'd like to hear why.

  Here old Mr. Shaw goes again right off.  He is "Spinning the facts" as is
his usual practice.  He is only surpassed by Dave Crocker.

>
>
> Of course, this doesn't stop Tony from claiming he represents this mysterious
> organization at http://www.house.gov/science/rutkowski_9-30.html. Does
> US Congress know any better? No, but, heck, let's just snow the politicians!

  Yes let's do snow the politicians.  The MoUvment (Read bowl movement) is
dead, it just doesn't know when to lay down.  And it is obvious to those of us
whom have been here for awhile and listened to Bob's dribblings, have found
that he has no idea what honesty is.  Be careful though, if you don't absolutely
agree with him and his fellow merry DEAD followers, you will get spamed
and ridiculed.

>
>
> Fortunately, the key Congress folks have now learned better.
>
> 2. Internet Law and Policy Forum (Tony Rutkowski): The ILPF has never
> made any statement to my knowledge on the gTLD-MoU activities. If they have,
> I'm not aware of it and I'd be curious to see a reference somewhere. I don't
> know what Tony's relationship is to the ILPF is but I imagine it is tangential so I
> doubt if you should list him as a "primary" contact. Why not write to
> Al Gidardi at the ILPF and get an "official statement" from ILPF? I have no
> idea what they would say but I'd guess it'd be fuzzy, "don't want to know" and
> nothing specific.

  Well we did allot of checking on Tony and did not get this protracted type
or response at all.  But this is yet again one of many slurs that Bob Shaw
spews out on a regular basis.  Nothing new.

>
>
> 3. AIM is at http://www.interactivehq.org/, not www.aim.org as you have linked.
>
> This is one of the most mysterious organizations I've ever run across. It has
> a tendency to make completely outrageous and bogus claims (like the gTLD-MoU
> bodies have some relationships to Lybia). The POC has had several AIM members
> contact us directly as apologists to say that they think this organization
> is crazy and that they have repeatedly warned them to "cool it". POC never heard
> of them until they came out guns blazing (and then they disappeared without a trace).
>
> AIM announced that they were going to completely sort this out through the
> "Open Internet Congress" which used to be at http://www.interactivehq.org/oic.

  This link is now longer in effect.  All you have to do is go the the home page
at http://www.interactivehq.org/  and you will see that the site is under much
needed construction.  A rather normal practice from time to time.  One might
rather view a link http://www.interactivehq.org/docs/9-30.htm to get a more
accurate point of view.


> This activity and the web reference have now completely disappeared.

  As I said and is obvious from their home page I stated just above is under
construction.  Please view, http://www.interactivehq.org/docs/9-30.htm.

>
>
> Some journalists claim that AIM is a front for NSI (see
> http://www.NewHavenAdvocate.com/articles/raiders.html). I have no idea as to
> whether this is true or false.

  Ahhhhh! But it is obvious that Bob wishes it were true, in that if he didn't
he wouldn't have made this statement.  Another smear spin.  Beginning
to get the picture yet?

>
>
> 4. Washington Web: Internet Policy Forum (Andy Sernovitz): Washington Web
> (http://www.washingtonweb.org/) is a domain name for a conference run by the
> above. Again, they make completely bogus claims on their site such as "The United
> Nations, International Telecommunication Union, and the World Intellectual
> Property Organization have each announced their intent to censor Internet Content."
>
> This is completely false but heck, it's certainly fun stuff for the folks trying
> to raise their visibility.
>
> 5. DNRC aka "The Association for The Creation and Propagation of Internet Policies"
> (aTCP/IP - get it? cool acronym? at http://domain-name.org/) is definitely an opponent.
> Refuse to provide a list of their members. They think domains names *don't* represent
> trademarks. Lots of trademarks folks think they're nuts.

  Trademark folks think anyone whom wants to expand the Name Space is nuts.
Typical knee jerk reaction for a group of lobbyist that didn't even know the
Internet existed several years ago.

> What can we say? The world is full of people who disagree. But one of the paradoxes of all
> time is Network Solutions listing them as a key policy organization at
> http://www.netsol.com/policy/index.html#orgs. Proof that politics makes strange bedfellows.

  Sure does Bob, and you are one of the strangest I have ever heard of.

>

> 6. Global Sense (Ken Freed): chock him up as an opponent. Admirable idealist.

  It is through Ideals that our country and many of the political structures of other
countries were established.  Bob would ridicule these folks.  Shameful behavior
in my humble opinion.  But you be the judge.  Thomas Payne is one of my
favorite Idealists along with Thomas Jefferson.  I am sure Bob would make
the same flippant remark should they be alive today and involved in this
debate.

>
>
> 7. Network Solutions, Inc.: definitely chock them up as an opponent. Heck, for US$ 10
> million a month, I'd get in line to fight the gTLD-MoU myself. 2 year olds don't want
> to share and surprisingly neither does NSI. Every month they can delay...

  Well my only comment to this bit of smear is that at least NSI produced something.

>
>
> 8. Interactive Services Association (ISA): They are not anti-gTLD-MoU to my knowledge.
> Please supply a reference if you believe otherwise. ISA wants a 30 day waiting period
> for domain names to ensure "the rights of trademark holders are fully taken into account
> in the development of any domain name management system"
> (see http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/03_20_98.htm).
>
> Of course, the latter makes you realize that your listed anti-MoU folks don't even in
> the most remote sense agree among themselves. But the gTLD-MoU makes a nice target since we
> seek to find a compromise between disparate points of view. I'd much prefer to see DNRC
> attack ISA or MCI or AT&T (who really want trademarks strongly protected and mandatory
> waiting periods to get a domain name) instead of the gTLD-MoU but that that would be *too*
> easy. Why not make a name for yourself! attack the gTLD-MoU! Issue press releases! Raise
> your visibility!

  Yes, Yes, Yes.  Many of us know that the gTLD-MoU thru its association with
WIPO, have been linked from the beginning of the IAHC process.  The trademark
lobby in Washington and throughout the world, whom didn't do their homework
for their clients when the internet was young now want to cry foul to the
"First come First serve" policy the NSI implemented.  Just another control
freak groups.

>
>
> Robert
> --
> Robert Shaw <robert.shaw@itu.int>
> Advisor, Global Information Infrastructure
> International Telecommunication Union <http://www.itu.int>
> Place des Nations, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland

 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