[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [icann-eu] [FYI] WHO to sue ICANN over .health?

To: Marc Schneiders <marc@schneiders.org>, Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
Subject: Re: [icann-eu] [FYI] WHO to sue ICANN over .health?
From: Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 14:57:38 +1300
Cc: icann-europe@fitug.de
Comment: This message comes from the icann-europe mailing list.
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0011192351040.85467-100000@pan.bijt.net>
References: <20001119230518.A32359@sobolev.does-not-exist.org>
Sender: owner-icann-europe@fitug.de

At 23:58 19/11/00 +0100, Marc Schneiders wrote:

>Not granting .HEALTH was a most wise decision. Wiser even than I was
>able to see before I read the above.
>

Similarly with .kids
Restricted TLD's are an attraction for  judge/jury/executioner-all-in-one
types.
The WHO has no separate judiciary, AFAIK.

Unless extremenly clearcut, like .edu, or .museum,  they will be either an
unstable or an oppressive environment for a DN holder.

--Joop Teernstra LL.M.--  
the Cyberspace Association and 
the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
Elected representative.
http://www.idno.org

References:
- [icann-eu] [FYI] WHO to sue ICANN over .health?
  - From: Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
- Re: [icann-eu] [FYI] WHO to sue ICANN over .health?
  - From: Marc Schneiders <marc@schneiders.org>

Prev by Date: Re: [icann-eu] [FYI] WHO to sue ICANN over .health?
Next by Date: [icann-eu] What is the status of the new TLDs?
Prev by thread: Re: [icann-eu] [FYI] WHO to sue ICANN over .health?
Next by thread: Re: [icann-eu] [FYI] WHO to sue ICANN over .health?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread