[governance] Can Icann really be necessary?

[Roland Perry]

In message <BANLkTimWAS6AG_AQnS1zQwU6qja8GpkRmw at mail.gmail.com>, at 
19:57:08 on Fri, 24 Jun 2011, Ivar A. M. Hartmann 
<ivarhartmann at gmail.com> writes

 >"Can Icann really be necessary?
>
 >"It's a question worth asking as the body that oversees internet domain 
 >names will now permit any suffix you want – at a price

This is a false premise, because you *can't* have any suffix you want. 
There are a multitude of rules (which have been the cause of all the 
debate) saying amongst other things that:

o  someone else has a better claim, or
o  you need to get permission from a third party (eg for many geo-names) 
o  or the name is banned altogether (too similar, offends decency etc)

And not forgetting whether you have the technical and financial muscle 
to run a registry - these names are a big step up the food chain from 
today's registrations in existing tlds.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t