Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Kent Crispin (kent@songbird.com)
Sat, 5 Dec 1998 11:30:18 -0800
On Thu, Dec 03, 1998 at 06:46:14PM -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:
>
> On 04-Dec-98 Kent Crispin wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 03, 1998 at 05:58:02PM -0800, Christopher Ambler wrote:
> >> >Absolutely. Iperdome has no more right to the name that AT&T.
> >> >
> >> >CORE has no more right to .web than IOD does, which is to say, none.
> >>
> >> Well, this is where we're going to have to agree to disagree, and
> >> see what ICANN does with the situation, presuming that they get
> >> that far.
> >>
> >> And, of course, hope that this gets worked out fairly and stays out
> >> of court.
> >
> > It will end up fairly, just like it did before; and it will probably
> > still end up in court, just like it did before; and the result will
> > be roughly the same.
>
> I doubt it. CORE has no more claim to .web than IOD did. IANA was not
> authorized by NSF to delegate any of these.
CORE has *never* said it has a claim on .web. CORE's claim is that
it is an IANA recognized registry, and that it will run *whatever*
TLDs that IANA delegated to it.
The idea of "having a claim" on a TLD is foreign to the fundamental
philosophy behind CORE. The gTLD MoU says that TLDs are a *public*
resource.
--
Kent Crispin, PAB Chair "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com lonesome." -- Mark Twain