North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
RE: Read this...Re: offtopic for NANOG - do not read
- From: Jim Fleming
- Date: Sat Apr 26 17:08:27 1997
On Saturday, April 26, 1997 12:54 PM, Carl Oppedahl[SMTP:email@example.com] wrote:
@ At 04:31 PM 04/26/97 -0400, Vince Wolodkin wrote:
@ >The only
@ >thing NSI has truly done that is awful is their TM dispute policy, and
@ >the IAHC has taken that very thing under its own wing.
@ Unfortunately for the Internet community, NSI has made it clear that it
@ doesn't plan to yield any control over .COM to anyone else, ever:
@ Networks Solutions seemed more definite. "It is not our
@ intention to share .com or the others [domains] we
@ register," Network Solutions spokesman
@ Christopher Clough said. "Those would obviously [be]
@ assets that we've developed . . . much as Microsoft
@ wouldn't share DOS," its proprietary software.
@ Network Solutions favors competition, but only in the
@ registration of new types of domains, Clough said.
@ (Network Solutions Dropped as Registrar Of Internet
@ Domains, By David S. Hilzenrath, April 24 1997; The Washington Post.)
@ Thus, it seems likely that (barring a shift in control over .COM) NSI would
@ continue forever, carrying out its awful policy and putting innocent domain
@ name owners out of business.
@ The only way that innocent domain name owners will have the cloud of NSI's
@ awful domain name policy lifted from their heads is if indeed the control
@ over .COM shifts elsewhere. So far as I can see, the most likely way for
@ that to happen is if IAHC's plans move forward and are put into place.
People and companies can now register in
other domains than .COM.
Why would a company want a .COM domain
when they can have something more expressive ?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -