From: Kenji Rikitake <kenji.rikitake@acm.org>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 3/4/98 10:04am
Subject: US Government should not regulate the gTLD issues

Dear US NTIA representative:

My name is Kenji Rikitake. I am a Japanese citizen. I administer
three Internet domains personally and one for my employer.

I strongly recommend the US Government to withdraw the proposal of the
Green Paper. The US Government should have studied much carefully about
the whole adminstrative issues before making the proposal public. What is
discussed in this Green Paper is far beyond the issues controllable by a
nation and must be treated with a proper international negotiation
process. By presenting the Green Paper, US Government proved its
ignorance on the current adminstrative issues on the Internet.

The proposal on the US Green Paper ignores the following points:

1. The accomplishment and efforts of gTLD-MoU and CoRE on TLD issues.

The US Green Paper is an apparent intervention to the implementation of
the gTLD-MoU and CoRE activities.

2. The fact that the root servers are already governed internationally,
and that the servers are not only for the United Stated of America.

If *ANY* government tries to own and establish control over the root
servers, the result will be disasterous. Only by the international
coordination the current DNS tree will be stably operated
internationally.

3. The effect of changing IANA from a non-governmental organization into
a government-controlled organization.

The IANA (and the new organization in the US Green Paper which inherits
IANA's functions) has the ultimate privilege on the technical integrity
of Internet, and should not be controlled under one government. Holding
the control of the IANA is not only about the DNS issue but about the
whole Internet protocol suite. *NO* government intervention to the IANA
is acceptable.

Sincerely yours,

Kenji Rikitake
Internet Archivist, Neuro Net Recordings
Toyonaka-City, Osaka, Japan
email: kenji.rikitake@acm.org

CC: Kenji Rikitake <kenji.rikitake@acm.org>

###

From: Stefan Ganzmann <frank.brushes@t-online.de>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 3/4/98 11:59am
Subject: new top level domains

Dear Sirs,

we are a small company in the south of Germany.

We want to have our own top level domain http\\www.frank.firm as frank.com and frank.de
are already in use by other companies.

Please help us by not blocking the new top level domains.

Thank you & best regards

Stefan Ganzmann
Frank & Co.
Tunauer Str. 2
D-79677 Schoenau / Germany

###

From: "Samantha Leader" <samanthaleader@your-house.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 3/4/98 4:13pm
Subject: Proposal Concerns

dns@ntia.doc.gov

To Whom It May Concern:

I agree for the most part with what "Michael 'traP' Bourdaa" bourdaa@chem.ucla.edu said about
"gTLD's and other alphabet soup."

I beg to differ with regards to the number of domains added to the system. There should be more choice for consumers such as myself. I think .shop, .firm, and .info are crucial additions. Why did the proposal ignore the GTLD-MOU? It is an important framework for new tlds. Do not forget they were deciding on names years ago. There is more information at http://www.gtld-mou.org-

He also says that .sex or .xxx would be good for pornographic sites. Unfortunately, it won't make it easier for parents to lock out, because sick people will always get around it. http://wwwinternic.com will not take you to internic, but to a pornographic site. This person should be brought before a court and not be allowed to hide behind their computer.

The point being, sickos will find their ways around any name, legitimate or otherwise.

Samantha Leader- a concerned U.S. resident
S. L.

###

From: "Joanne Boccelli" <boccelli@ohio-state.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 3/4/98 4:25pm
Subject: International issues should be regulated by an international body

March 4, 1998
Ira Magaziner
Department of Commerce
U.S. Government

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am thankful that what I have read on the Internet is only a draft. If it was not, I would be very disappointed with the U.S. position on the domain names. I am proud to be a citizen of the U.S.


International issues deserve an international regulating body. Perhaps one in Geneva Switzerland where the government is neutral. This is the mistake of the U.S. position in that it does not recognize the rest of the world.

Please do not make the mistake of allowing the Internet to implode. Just because trademark holders want to keep their .com names does not mean the rest of us should suffer without the names we want.

Sincerely,

Joanne Boccelli
Web Designer

###

From: Denis BUCHER <dbucher@horus.ch>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 3/4/98 5:19pm
Subject: Unbelievelable ?

Hello !

This is my comment to your text :

1. How can you even think about this subject ? You're the governement
of 1 out of the 200 coutries in the world ?!?!?! From which rights are
you taking part to this ?

2. I thought everything was going on with gTLD-MOU, CORE, IANA, things
like that, why are you cutting all this work down ??? And what will
happen with people having already payed for domains ??? Will the U.S.
refund them ???

3. What about the domains already payed for ? And what about all the
enterprises that set-up pre-registration tools, they could loose a lot
of money...

4. In my mnd, you should give your excuse to the Internet people or
"society", it's like if a lawyer came to a physicist lab and became
its boss : Nonsense !

5. You are simply THIEVES : Your text seems (to me) to be the exact
plagiat from what IANA, CORE, and others which I don't know the name
wrote last year and before : Cut & Paste !!!

6. I hope that not only in the 199 other countries but in yours too
people won't follow what you decide, because you have no right to
decide (or tell from where)...

Cu !

Denis Bucher

###

From: "Leonard Werbes" <werbes@phayze.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(DNS)
Date: 3/4/98 5:31pm

Attention: Ira Magaziner
Dns@ntia.doc.gov

Dear Sir or Madam:

We would like to register the names of ansellcollins.firm, ansellcollins.info, etc. Your proposal is, frankly, wasting our time. I suppose the government has never moved quickly enough. Years have gone by now we are still waiting. You must realize that the pace of the Internet is a little faster than the foot-dragging bureaucracy of the U.S. government.

Other governments are drafting their own ways to manage the domain name system. What will you do? Surely leave it up to an already established group such as core.

Sincerely,

Leonard Werbes
Claims Adjuster
Ansell Collins

###

From: Denis BUCHER <dbucher@anaxagore.horus.ch>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 3/4/98 5:31pm
Subject: Comments

Hello !

"It is our hope that by creating a public record of the comments, all who are interested in resolving these issues can benefit
from one another's thinking and that this public record will itself further the process of agreement being reached on key
issues," said Larry Irving, assistant secretary of Commerce and administrator of the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA).

Is it a joke ? Many user groups like ISOC already exists, what yre you
doing ? Re-inventing the Internet ???? Internet exists, websites exist
as well as User groups, no need to reinvent !

"Many believe that its extraordinary growth and
success stem, at least in part, from its decentralized structure and bottom-up self-regulatory governance. The Clinton
Administration strongly believes that our challenge is to resolve these issues within that unique structure and
governance."

This sentance condredicts itself :

1. Internet sucessfull because of bottow self-governance
2. *You* want to do it

Don't do it and everything will be better...

And anyway you have no right to do anything without all the countries
beging understood !

dbucher@thotp.ch

###

From: Denis BUCHER <dbucher@horus.ch>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 3/4/98 6:22pm
Subject: Comments

A. Appropriate Principles

The Government seeks comment on the principles by which it should
evaluate proposals for the registration and
administration of Internet domain names. Are the following principles
appropriate? Are they complete? If not, how
should they be revised? How might such principles best be fostered?

a. Competition in and expansion of the domain name registration system
should be encouraged. Conflicting domains, systems, and registries
should not be permitted to jeopardize the interoperation of the
Internet, however. The addressing scheme should not prevent any user
from connecting to any other site.

That's evident...

b. The private sector, with input from governments, should develop
stable, consensus-based self-governing mechanisms
for domain name registration and management that adequately defines
responsibilities and maintains accountability.

No, it should be international associations like ISOC, ITU that should
do that, not any governement nor money-driven entities...

c. These self-governance mechanisms should recognize the inherently
global nature of the Internet and be able to evolve as necessary over
time.

Yes.

d. The overall framework for accommodating competition should be open,
robust, efficient, and fair.

Yes...

e. The overall policy framework as well as name allocation and
management mechanisms should promote prompt, fair, and efficient
resolution of conflicts, including conflicts over proprietary rights.

I would say before all that : Unexpensive !!! Just think to small or
private entities !

f. A framework should be adopted as quickly as prudent consideration of
these issues permits.

Yes, the fastest would be simply to continue !!!

B. General/Organizational Framework Issues

1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of current domain name
registration systems?

Countries TLDs : (.fr .ch .uk .mx ...)

- Too expensive in some countries, forcing entities to take .com or
.org
+ Legally more clear
+ Easier to register in same country
+ Each country has got its own preferences

International TLDs : (.com .org .net ...)

- Too expensive (Especially for .org)
- No competitive prices (monopolistic)
- Only in the US and in english
- Commercially (non non-for-profit) driven
- No democraty if internic decided to add new gTLD
- Internic has got VERY BAD SUPPORT, they even don't reply email
Therefore they try to take the MOST money they can without
doing their job correctly as far as I saw (I have registered 5-10
domains)
+ Not too expensive for .com compared to some countries (.fr)
+ Good software (easy to use, easy to pay)
- Not enough space for firms, like wash products Startbrite in US and
telescopes Starbrite France, who wons : The first to register...
Ok, this is the best solution, but there should be :
info@starbrite.sky AND info@starbrite.clean (for example) !

2. How might current domain name systems be improved?

- If we have wash products Startbrite in US and telescopes Starbrite
France, who wons : The first to register... Ok, this is the best
solution, but there should be : info@starbrite.sky AND
info@starbrite.clean (for example) !

- 100 registrars that would ask the money they want (15$, 50$) for
the services (exactely like the CORE, *this* was good)

3. By what entity, entities, or types of entities should current domain
name systems be administered? What should the makeup of such an entity
be?

International entity, like UNO. Why not ITU, or some like that ?

4. Are there decision-making processes that can serve as models for
deciding on domain name registration systems (e.g.,
network numbering plan, standard-setting processes, spectrum
allocation)? Are there private/public sector administered
models or regimes that can be used for domain name registration (e.g.,
network numbering plan, standard setting
processes, or spectrum allocation processes)?

What is the proper role of national or international
governmental/non-governmental organizations, if any, in national and
international domain name registration systems?

As I said, I think that ITU (or ISO, UNO, ???) should make some
referendums or RFC to decide the new names, these names should then
be available on some computer systems for the regitrars to offer
domains in them...

5. Should generic top level domains (gTLDs), (e.g., .com), be retired
from circulation? Should geographic or country codes
(e.g., .US) be required? If so, what should happen to the .com registry?
Are gTLD management issues separable from
questions about International Standards Organization (ISO) country code
domains?

Yes, because 2-letters domains should remain as country-driven domains
for everything that's only country-specific.

I would suggest to *clearly* decide the domain names AT ONCE. For
example,
no need for .music .painting .sculpt if you make .art ...

.com could be == .biz

6. Are there any technological solutions to current domain name
registration issues? Are there any issues concerning the relationship of
registrars and gTLDs with root servers?

Yes, it's very simple : If the root servers are maintained by a
non-profit
organisation driven by ITU (or other) registrars just have to tell the
root servers "I want domain thing.arts", the root servers (and another
system) says "Ok" or "Already registered", and that's all.

7. How can we ensure the scalability of the domain name system name and
address spaces as well as ensure that root
servers continue to interoperate and coordinate?

That all that is handled by an international non-for profit entity
driven by UNO, ITU (or other: I don't know very well these entities)

8. How should the transition to any new systems be accomplished?

Strange question : If the root servers are updated, the whole
world is updated within 3-4 days...

9. Are there any other issues that should be addressed in this area?

C. Creation of New gTLDs

10. Are there technical, practical, and/or policy considerations that
constrain the total number of different gTLDs that
can be created?

No technical but logical :

As said earlier, you cannot create .arts and .music .sculpt .paintings
because what would you choose : ".music" or ".arts" ?

11. Should additional gTLDs be created?

Yes, or ask to remove .com ! (.com is sur-occupied)

12. Are there technical, business, and/or policy issues about
guaranteeing the scalability of the name space associated with
increasing the number of gTLDs?

Yes, they must be all created at once, otherwise people will register
new domains and *then* remark that a better came out among the new
ones...

13. Are gTLD management issues separable from questions about ISO
country code domains?

Yes...

14. Are there any other issues that should be addressed in this area?

D. Policies for Registries

15. Should a gTLD registrar have exclusive control over a particular
gTLD?

NO !!! VERY DANGEROUS ! Just imagine someone takes .sex ! Who will get
it ? Why some registrar and not another ? This is a money example but
some other examples are more ethical, like .world : Who will have it ?

15-> Are there any technical limitations on using shared registries for
some or all gTLDs?

No.

15->> Can exclusive and non-exclusive gTLDs coexist?

Yes, but I would NOT accept exclusive gTLDs !

16. Should there be threshold requirements for domain name registrars,
and what responsibilities should such registrars
have? Who will determine these and how?

Responsabilities = 100% working or be canceled
Threshold : No, as long as they pay what they should

Who will determine : The non-profit that runs root-servers

17. Are there technical limitations on the possible number of domain
name registrars?

Too much is not good otherwise it's like each private may become it...
But otherwise no *technical* limitations

18. Are there technical, business and/or policy issues about the name
space raised by increasing the number of domain
name registrars?

No

19. Should there be a limit on the number of different gTLDs a given
registrar can administer? Does this depend on
whether the registrar has exclusive or non-exclusive rights to the gTLD?

Exclusive right are UNACCEPTABLE ! (Except things like .coca-cola which
should be FORBIDDEN (otherwise you don't need gTLD anymore !!!!!)
Therefore only non-profit organisation should create new gTLD which
are *common* *names* like .soda .hotel .restaurant ...

Any registrar should be able to sell/register ANY gTLD : More simple
and fair !

20. Are there any other issues that should be addressed in this area?

E. Trademark Issues

21. What trademark rights (e.g., registered trademarks, common law
trademarks, geographic indications, etc.), if any,
should be protected on the Internet vis-a-vis domain names?

Very known names like "McDonald" or "Coca-Cola" should be protected
and it should be possible to do it only 60 days after the domain
registration...

But if a Kodak.com is there to sell a chemical molecule called Kodak,
(even non-protected) Kodak shouldn't have the domain as long as
the molecule-site is clearly something else than Kodak-Photography

22. Should some process of preliminary review of an application for
registration of a domain name be required, before
allocation, to determine if it conflicts with a trademark, a trade name,
a geographic indication, etc.?

NO ! We shouldn't annoy 99% of non-problem domains for the 1%

22-> If so, what standards should be used? Who should conduct the
preliminary review? If a conflict is found, what should be done, e.g.,
domain
name applicant and/or trademark owner notified of the conflict?
Automatic referral to dispute settlement?

The best would to take "First proof of existence" : If a trademark is
more important (except world-wide trademarks) but was delivered later
than the domain was, the domain remains to the first owner...

23. Aside from a preliminary review process, how should trademark rights
be protected on the Internet vis-a-vis domain
names? What entity(ies), if any, should resolve disputes? Are national
courts the only appropriate forum for such
disputes? Specifically, is there a role for national/international
governmental/nongovernmental organizations?

There could be all a process before courts ! The CORE found a nice
way to do it...

24. How can conflicts over trademarks best be prevented? What
information resources (e.g. databases of registered
domain names, registered trademarks, trade names) could help reduce
potential conflicts? If there should be a database(s),
who should create the database(s)? How should such a database(s) be
used?

Nothing : First-come first-served. Firms like Coca-Cola should say
"coca-cola.*" is forbidden and if the process of number 23 decides
they are right they register as offline domains coca-cola.* with a
reduced price...

25. Should domain name applicants be required to demonstrate that they
have a basis for requesting a particular domain
name?

NO

25->If so, what information should be supplied? Who should evaluate the
information? On the basis of what criteria?

26. How would the number of different gTLDs and the number of registrars
affect the number and cost of resolving
trademark disputes?

The more gTLD, the less disputes, the less costs.

27. Where there are valid, but conflicting trademark rights for a single
domain name, are there any technological solutions?

Yes : Take 2 firms in Ireland (at random) called Starbrite :

Starbrite (telescopes)
Starbrite (to wash boats, or your house)

Either :

- Nothing on www.starbrite.com
- Telescopes on www.starbrite-tele.com
- Boats washing on www.starbrite-wash.com

Either :

- Telescopes on www.starbrite.sky
- Boats washing on www.starbrite.washing

Either :

- *Split* *page* on www.starbrite.com :

One column with telescopes, the other with wash products

- Telescopes on www.starbrite-tele.com
- Boats washing on www.starbrite-wash.com

Other example :

Take 2 firms doins boot washing products one in UK the other in Japan
both called Washer :

Either

- Washer.washing with 2 columns
- Washer-UK.washing
- Washer-Jp.washing

Either

- Washer.washing with 2 columns
- Washer.UK.washing
- Washer.Jp.washing

Either

- Nothing on Washer.washing
- Washer-UK.washing with 2 columns
- Washer.Jp.washing with 2 columns

28. Are there any other issues that should be addressed in this area?

See you !

Denis Bucher

###

From: Marianna Milicevic <milicevic@conk.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 3/4/98 3:57pm
Subject: NSI ALIENS

Ira Magaziner
Dept. of Commerce
USA
PLANET EARTH
MILKY WAY GALAXY

Dear Dr. Ruth,

THANK YOU IRA FOR SAVING US AGAINST THE WORST SCUM IN THE UNIVERSE, NAMELY ,
NETWORK SOLUTIONS.
I ALWAYS KNEW THEY WERE ALIENS.

Sincerely yours,
Marianna Milicevic

---------------------------------------------------
Get your Free, Private Web-based E-mail from CONK!,
Your Online Guide to Nonsense at http://conk.com

###

From: "Charles Goldman" <charles_goldman@hotmail.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 3/4/98 1:08pm
Subject: get lost, Magaziner!

Subject: get lost, Magaziner!

Your "green paper" is bringing chaos to the net and shame to the U.S.A.!
What's your share from network solutions for extending their monopoly??
These bastards are making more than $8 million each month you're
delaying competition!!!

get lost, Magaziner!

Charles Goldman,
U.S. Citizen and longtime Internet User

P.S. For an excellent backgrounder, check out:
http://www.NewHavenAdvocate.com/articles/raiders.html

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

###

From: "Charles Goldman" <charles_goldman@hotmail.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 3/4/98 1:09pm
Subject: get lost, Magaziner!

Subject: get lost, Magaziner!

Your "green paper" is bringing chaos to the net and shame to the U.S.A.!
What's your share from network solutions for extending their monopoly??
These bastards are making more than $8 million each month you're
delaying competition!!!

get lost, Magaziner!

Charles Goldman,
U.S. Citizen and longtime Internet User

P.S. For an excellent backgrounder, check out:
http://www.NewHavenAdvocate.com/articles/raiders.html

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

###