[atlarge-discuss] Re: [ga] Re: [centr-ga] Re: [nc-deletes] FW: [council] Concerns Regarding Report of DeletesTask Force

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

John and all former DNSO GA members or other interested parties,

John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. wrote:

> From: "Eric Dierker" <eric@hi-tek.com>
> >
> > What you have written here suggests that the registrar owns a domain name
> as
> > something seperate from an IP address.  I find this illusive if not down
> > right wrong.
>
> I have no idea how you get that out of what I wrote.

  I don't know how Eric got that out of what you wrote either...
I am beginning to become worried about Eric of late...
Reading comprehension recently displayed by Eric on
the Atlarge-Discuss forum have recently shown similar
results from Eric...

>
>
> The point here is that a domain name is whatever the registration contract
> defines it to be.  And presently, contracts for .com domain names define them
> as having a fixed term of registration.
>
> It's very simple.  If I agree to feed your dog every day for a term of one
> year beginning on May 1, 2003, then on May 2, 2004, I will not show up to
> feed your dog.  How hard is that to understand?

  Not difficult to understand at all IMHO.  Nor was your earlier
post to which you refer to here seem difficult to comprehend
either.

>
>
> Now, let's say in January 2004, someone came along claiming that I was
> supposed to be feeding his dog instead of yours.  The two of you can fight
> all you want, but I still can guaran-dang-tee you that, come May 2, 2004, I
> am not going to be feeding ANYBODY'S dog unless I get paid for another year's
> supply of dog food.  It is that simple.
>
> And this exercise in defining deletion policy is, in part, an exercise in
> defining what a domain name *is* for those registries subject to the policy.

  Good point and the Sex.com case which has been discussed not long
ago on this an other forums would be useful for Eric to review yet
again,
if he ever did before ( Some doubt as to that )...  Hence begging the
legal question yet again, is a domain name property and what type
of property is it?  The california supreme court in the sex.com case
was or is to address that very question...

>
>
> The objection to having a uniform deletion policy is simply "because some
> people want domain names to do something different, then it will lead to
> problems if domain names don't do what those people want them to do."  That
> kind of objection is circular.
>
> If it is established as an inherent property of a domain name registration
> that "it will expire if the renewal is not paid", then the source of problems
> will be picking out when an 'exception' is desired and when an 'exception' is
> not desired.
>
> There are definite and well-known perceived 'abuses' that have arisen from
> the curious deletion policies of certain registrars.  If you want to continue
> to delete names on a loosy-goosy "do what feels right in the particular
> situation" way, then that's fine, but you don't need a policy to keep doing
> that.  Now, already in this process, we have seen a registry representative
> assert that there was something in the RAA that prevents registrar name
> warehousing, but when challenged to point out where, not a peep was heard.
> The reason is that the RAA contemplates some future "consensus policy" on
> name deletions and registrar warehousing, but no such consensus policy has
> ever been adopted.

  Indeed.  Consensus that cannot be measured by any and all of the
interested parties, namely registrants, and users, ICANN has no
mechanism
that is legitimate by which to determine such a "Consensus".

>
>
> And, absolutely, there are all kinds of situations where people do not comply
> with contracts, or pay fees for services, for all sorts of justifiable and
> perfectly sympathetic reasons.  But let's get real about this - if a domain
> name is important to someone, then they can certainly pay, right now, for up
> to TEN YEARS of registration for less than around $200.  Good golly, if we
> are still futzing around with domain names ten years from now, then just
> shoot me.
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de