[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: No General Assembly yet to assist us
- To: Non-Commercial Domain Name Holders Constituency Discussion List <firstname.lastname@example.org>, ICANN Comments <Comments@icann.org>, DNSO GA <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: No General Assembly yet to assist us
- From: Jeff Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 11:49:34 +0100
- Organization: INEG. Inc. (Spokesman INEGroup)
- References: <LYR1799-4713-1999.08.03-13.09.13--Jwkckid1email@example.com>
Kathy and all,
I believe that the IS a DNSO GA, is there not! Didn't the pNC and
Generalisimo Sola declare the firstname.lastname@example.org (Now the email@example.com)
as the GA? Is this within the purview of the pNC? I am not sure. But
I believe that the GA none the less, are those that are on the firstname.lastname@example.org
mailing list essentially make up the DNSO GA.
If however you are refering to the ICANN "Membership", than yes I
agree with your comments entirely and have not idea what can in
reality, can be done here, other than to declare all of those that were
on the email@example.com mailing list as the ICANN "Membership".
> I agree that the General Assembly should be voting on something as important
> as an entirely new system of arbitration for deciding cybersquatting -- and
> the intellectual property community hopes -- and all sorts of other issues
> they would like to raise with a new private law created by the World
> Intellectual Property Organization.
> Further, the General Assembly is viewed as a support for non-commercial
> organizations and small businesses and individuals (those who will likely be
> the targets of these arbitrations).
> But there is as yet no General Assembly, and ICANN would like to adopt this
> cybersquatting policy as soon as posssible.
> Any proposals about what we can do?
> Kathryn Kleiman
> In a message dated 8/2/99 7:33:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
> > I agree compleatly. Not only is what you contend correct, but it
> > seems to me that the GA should have a vote for final approval
> > of any broad reaching and effecting policy such as this one as well.
> > Anything less would be a complete disregard for the White Paper
> > and the MOU as well...
> You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: Jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ncdnhc-discuss-1799I@lyris.isoc.org
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208