RE: Re[2]: Possible forced deletion of your .org domain.

From: easygoing (ezgoing8@bellsouth.net)
Date: Fri Mar 02 2001 - 21:57:18 EST


Which is the problem. We have carried these domains on our books, promoted
most of them with working sites. Now we are suddenly going to lose all
rights to them?

I don't think so, not without adequate compensation from Verisign, since
they now own Network Solutions.

-----Original Message-----
From: Kit [mailto:kitlist@pacificnet.net]
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 8:36 PM
To: easygoing; William X. Walsh
Cc: Opensrs Discuss
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Possible forced deletion of your .org domain.

I believe deleting your .org domain would be illegal. All they can do is
not allow you to renew your existing .org domain if you don't meet the
requirements.

--Kit

> This is one of those rare times that I agree with William. We have spend
> time and money developing our .org names. Why should we lose this
> investment now that Verisign wants to keep the .com registry and is
willing
> to negotiate away the other two to keep it.
>
> We registered these domains under an interpretation of the rules by
Network
> Solutions that allowed it when they needed the money from the extra
> registrations, we have paid for them each year and we see no reason we
> should suddenly be asked to give them up.
>
> If we are requested to give them up, we expect to be compensated for the
> time and money that we have invested in them to date.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-discuss-list@opensrs.org
> [mailto:owner-discuss-list@opensrs.org]On Behalf Of William X. Walsh
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 5:26 PM
> To: Ross Wm. Rader
> Cc: Swerve; opensrs discuss; Scott Allan; Erol Mo; Chuck Charles
> Daminato
> Subject: Re[2]: Possible forced deletion of your .org domain.
>
>
>
> Friday, March 02, 2001, 8:21:56 AM, Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
>> My interpretation of their stance is that commercial interests should be
>> driven from the .org namespace, not the non-commercial interests.
>
> This, also, would be unacceptable. Especially after encouraging
> commercial interests to move into this namespace.
>
> There is no constructive reason for this policy to be permitted to
> move forward, and I hope everyone here will endeavor to vigorously
> oppose it.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William mailto:william@userfriendly.com
>
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:36:19 EDT