I repeat part of my reply to another of your posts:Legally recognized? There
is no legal standing for any particular root. There have been arguments over
domain names and trademarks. The courts have said that a TLD cannot be trademarked.
There is nothing about root server systems which says one is legal and another is
illegal. "Rights" have not been established as yet, since no court case has
addressed that subject in its entirety. That is yet to come. The server
you refer to is one server which happens to contain the master rootzone file for
the ICANN root, is authorative for the .com/net/org/edu TLDs and is simply part of
the most well known root system. It does not have the legal standing of being
the ONLY root system which the public can use. It could disappear tomorrow
and the internet would be intact because the other roots also carry the same information.
As
much as you would like to have people believe that the ICANN root is the only "legal"
root system, it is simply not true and you know it. As other root systems emerge,
the public will become even more aware. There are now both public and private
root sytems.
FYI, if ICANN is handed control of the so-called a-root, this,
too, will be a private root system operated for the public. Gee, what a concept.
For now, though, the final decision is still with the DoC. Other governments
or entities may decide that this USG root is not what they need and begin there own
root server systems. After all, it's a matter of technology, not law.
Hmmm... If ICANN can create collisions, then what of others... Quite a precedent.
It gets more interesting.
Sir,
> The ORSC
is ILLEGAL and NOT Recognized in the eyes of courts. Period.
Wrong. The
court case had to do with trademarks. To my knowledge, there aren't any illegal root
server systems any more than there are illegal intranets and extranets. Perhaps
you should consider a bit of caution before bringing libelous accusations of illegal
activity.
>You can say what you like, but do you think the judge who hears the
IOD trial will side IOD or ICANN? Obviously the judge will side ICANN.
I suspect
that the next case will take a slightly different track. It should be interesting.
> History says so. IOD sued both IAHC and CORE
and lost both its 2 lawsuits misrably. Please take note that ICANN wants to tell
the average Joe this and has published the "Memorandum of Decision in Image Online
Design, Inc. v. CORE Ass'n" at this url:
Wrong again. IOD withdrew the IAHC
suit because it was to be moot with the formation of ICANN. Again, the second
suite involved trademarks. It is a mistake to read more into it than exists
in law.
>http://www.icann.org/tlds/correspondence/iod-v-core-22jun00.htm
>
I hope the above explanation helps you understand. If
not, too bad and I would advise you to go back to pre-school!
Again, you show a
serious lack of intelligence by resorting to personal attacks.
--Eugene
Kang