Received: from oemcomputer (209-122-254-195.s195.tnt1.lnh.md.dialup.rcn.com [209.122.254.195]) by bandit.georgetown.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id AAA17439; Sat, 15 May 1999 00:00:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <009201be9e87$782951e0$c3fe7ad1@oemcomputer> From: "Ronnie Breckheimer" To: "Brett Glass" , , Subject: Re: grandfathering of .us domains? Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 00:00:25 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 greetings... no matter where we go with the domain name situation, it is going to be completely screwed up....we just have to hope the government does not turn it into a complete mess and stop e-commerce progress, as that is what drives the future of the web globally. Brett is right, that latest court decision was huge and will have lasting implications. veronica -----Original Message----- From: Brett Glass To: Paul Fox ; us-list@ntiant1.ntia.doc.gov Date: Friday, May 14, 1999 8:05 PM Subject: Re: grandfathering of .us domains? >You should set your expectations at the highest possible level. A >judge has recently ruled that domain names are property. If your >domain name is taken away from you by government, you very likely >have a cause of action under the "takings" clause of the US >Constitution. > >--Brett Glass > >At 05:24 PM 5/14/99 -0400, Paul Fox wrote: >>hi -- i haven't seen any traffic here since i subscribed, so i don't >>know if there's anyone out there. but i'll go ahead anyway. >> >>has there been any discussion of whether prior "holders" of .us >>domain names will be permitted to continue using those names after >>the current debate is resolved, in whatever fashion? >> >>many years ago when i began using my (family-name based) domain i >>figured i could probably use it forever. if that seems unlikely, >>then a) i'll feel bad about it for a while, and b) i'll begin the >>somewhat painful process of weaning myself off of that domain and >>onto something that would hopefully be more permanent. >> >>any thoughts on how high i should set my expectations? >> >>paul >>=--------------------- >> paul fox, pgf@foxharp.boston.ma.us (arlington, ma, where it's 60.1 degrees) > > . Received: from [206.5.17.2] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 3.03.0018/1.acsd) with ESMTP id ca012846 for ; Sat, 15 May 1999 10:13:53 -0400 Message-Id: <4.2.0.37.19990515095155.00aadd50@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.37 (Beta) Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 10:13:41 -0400 To: "Ronnie Breckheimer" , "Brett Glass" ,, From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: grandfathering of US domains? In-Reply-To: <009201be9e87$782951e0$c3fe7ad1@oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_827210215==_.ALT" --=====================_827210215==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 12:00 AM 5/15/99 , Ronnie Breckheimer wrote: >greetings... > >no matter where we go with the domain name situation, it is going to be >completely screwed up....we just have to hope the government does not turn >it into a complete mess and stop e-commerce progress, as that is what drives >the future of the web globally. Brett is right, that latest court decision >was huge and will have lasting implications. Ronnie, Could you explain what you would regard as "a complete mess?" Can multiple ontologies exist for the US domain? (Note there are no "dots" in domain names.) --tony --=====================_827210215==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" At 12:00 AM 5/15/99 , Ronnie Breckheimer wrote:
greetings...

no matter where we go with the domain name situation, it is going to be
completely screwed up....we just have to hope the government does not turn
it into a complete mess and stop e-commerce progress, as that is what drives
the future of the web globally.  Brett is right, that latest court decision
was huge and will have lasting implications.

Ronnie,

Could you explain what you would regard as "a complete mess?"

Can multiple ontologies exist for the US domain?
(Note there are no "dots" in domain names.)





--tony --=====================_827210215==_.ALT-- . Received: from oemcomputer (209-122-214-194.s448.tnt3.lnh.md.dialup.rcn.com [209.122.214.194]) by bandit.georgetown.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA20812; Sat, 15 May 1999 11:12:33 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <002101be9ee5$645d7b60$c2d67ad1@oemcomputer> From: "Ronnie Breckheimer" To: "A.M. Rutkowski" , Subject: e-commerce is the issue Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 11:12:46 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001E_01BE9EC3.DC3625A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01BE9EC3.DC3625A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tony - Point is there are already so many domain names in use for e-commerce = and for the government to come in and mess with something without = forethought, as we know they have done in the past, could cause problems = for growth....at a time when the economy is really great, which means = the downside is coming in the near future, our government must take = precautionary steps in dealing with the volatility of the information = economy. I do think there are several solutions, however, we must take into = account intellectual property law with respect to domain names and = e-commerce. We also must make sure the implementation structure of new = domain names does not hinder e-business. Essentially, there is more at = stake here than just the "name" itself. The extension(s) are the easy = part...assuming the ramifications of those decisions are the important = factors in this discussion. Cheers! Veronica -----Original Message----- From: A.M. Rutkowski To: Ronnie Breckheimer ; Brett Glass = ; us-list@ntiant1.ntia.doc.gov = ; pgf@foxharp.boston.ma.us = Date: Saturday, May 15, 1999 10:13 AM Subject: Re: grandfathering of US domains? =20 =20 At 12:00 AM 5/15/99 , Ronnie Breckheimer wrote: =20 greetings... =20 no matter where we go with the domain name situation, it is = going to be completely screwed up....we just have to hope the government = does not turn it into a complete mess and stop e-commerce progress, as that is = what drives the future of the web globally. Brett is right, that latest = court decision was huge and will have lasting implications. =20 Ronnie, =20 Could you explain what you would regard as "a complete mess?" =20 Can multiple ontologies exist for the US domain? (Note there are no "dots" in domain names.) =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 --tony=20 ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01BE9EC3.DC3625A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tony = -
 
Point is there are already so = many domain=20 names in use for e-commerce and for the government to come in and mess = with=20 something without forethought, as we know they have done in the past, = could=20 cause problems for growth....at a time when the economy is really great, = which=20 means the downside is coming in the near future, our government must = take=20 precautionary steps in dealing with the volatility of the information=20 economy.
 
I do think there are several = solutions,=20 however, we must take into account intellectual property law with = respect to=20 domain names and e-commerce.  We also must make sure the = implementation=20 structure of new domain names does not hinder e-business.  = Essentially,=20 there is more at stake here than just the "name" itself.  = The=20 extension(s) are the easy part...assuming the ramifications of those = decisions=20 are the important factors in this discussion.
 
Cheers!
 
Veronica
-----Original = Message-----
From:=20 A.M. Rutkowski <amr@netmagic.com>
To: = Ronnie=20 Breckheimer <breckhev@gusun.georgetown.e= du>;=20 Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>;=20 us-list@ntiant1.ntia.doc.gov= =20 <us-list@ntiant1.ntia.doc.gov= >;=20 pgf@foxharp.boston.ma.us=20 <pgf@foxharp.boston.ma.us>=
Date:=20 Saturday, May 15, 1999 10:13 AM
Subject: Re: = grandfathering of=20 US domains?

At 12:00 AM 5/15/99 , Ronnie = Breckheimer=20 wrote:
greetings...

no matter where = we go=20 with the domain name situation, it is going to be
completely = screwed=20 up....we just have to hope the government does not turn
it = into a=20 complete mess and stop e-commerce progress, as that is what=20 drives
the future of the web globally.  Brett is right, = that=20 latest court decision
was huge and will have lasting=20 implications.

Ronnie,

Could you explain what = you=20 would regard as "a complete mess?"

Can multiple = ontologies=20 exist for the US domain?
(Note there are no "dots" in = domain=20 names.)





--tony ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01BE9EC3.DC3625A0-- . Received: from [206.5.17.2] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 3.03.0018/1.acsd) with ESMTP id ha012851 for ; Sat, 15 May 1999 11:33:23 -0400 Message-Id: <4.2.0.37.19990515111052.00aa67b0@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.37 (Beta) Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 11:33:10 -0400 To: "Ronnie Breckheimer" , From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: e-commerce is the issue In-Reply-To: <002101be9ee5$645d7b60$c2d67ad1@oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_831979262==_.ALT" --=====================_831979262==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 11:12 AM 5/15/99 , Ronnie Breckheimer wrote: > >Point is there are already so many domain names in use for e-commerce and >for the government to come in and mess with something without forethought, >as we know they have done in the past, could cause problems for >growth....at a time when the economy is really great, which means the >downside is coming in the near future, our government must take >precautionary steps in dealing with the volatility of the information economy. > >I do think there are several solutions, however, we must take into account >intellectual property law with respect to domain names and e-commerce. We >also must make sure the implementation structure of new domain names does >not hinder e-business. Essentially, there is more at stake here than just >the "name" itself. The extension(s) are the easy part...assuming the >ramifications of those decisions are the important factors in this discussion. DNS is simply a means of distributing maintenance of host names at the edges of self-organizing network resources. Could you articulate what it is that's at stake? Is it just some possible user confusion or is there something else? Arguably, hasn't the self-defining, brand and marketing name approach for COM, ORG, and NET domains been a principal driver of ECommerce development? Why wouldn't that same paradigm apply within the US domain? Isn't this for the marketplace to decide? Does the government have any role in this? If it does, isn't as participant in the marketplace? best, --tony --=====================_831979262==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" At 11:12 AM 5/15/99 , Ronnie Breckheimer wrote:
 
Point is there are already so many domain names in use for e-commerce and for the government to come in and mess with something without forethought, as we know they have done in the past, could cause problems for growth....at a time when the economy is really great, which means the downside is coming in the near future, our government must take precautionary steps in dealing with the volatility of the information economy.
 
I do think there are several solutions, however, we must take into account intellectual property law with respect to domain names and e-commerce.  We also must make sure the implementation structure of new domain names does not hinder e-business.  Essentially, there is more at stake here than just the "name" itself.  The extension(s) are the easy part...assuming the ramifications of those decisions are the important factors in this discussion.

DNS is simply a means of distributing maintenance of
host names at the edges of self-organizing network resources.
Could you articulate what it is that's at stake?  Is it
just some possible user confusion or is there something
else?

Arguably, hasn't the self-defining, brand and marketing name
approach for COM, ORG, and NET domains been a principal driver
of ECommerce development?  Why wouldn't that same paradigm
apply within the US domain?  Isn't this for the marketplace
to decide?  Does the government have any role in this?  If
it does, isn't as participant in the marketplace?

best,

--tony --=====================_831979262==_.ALT-- .