It is revealing to note that
no restriction on .org registration is included in the proposed registry agreement,
which contains no reference to an Appendix L (Registration Restrictions) - in stark
contrast to the agreement for the new gTLDs (section 3.82 at http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/unsponsored/registry-agmt-26feb01.htm)
the document at http://www.icann.org/melbourne/proposed-verisign-agreements-topic.htm
and http://corporate.verisign.com/policy/resources/WA1235857.pdf, described by VeriSign
(http://corporate.verisign.com/news/2001/pr_20010301.html) simply as a "summary"
of the proposed agreements, mentions "a global registry for the specific use of non-profit
organizations" and "the return of the .org registry to its original intended use".
reporting today seems to take the story even further away from the published proposed
Wall Street Journal / ZDNet:
indicated that it wants "org" Web addresses reserved only for nonprofit organizations
"after some appropriate transition period," a restriction that hasn't been enforced
in recent years. Details haven't been worked out, though one ICANN official suggested
that current "org" Web sites may be allowed to continue regardless of their affiliation
I have no doubt that this ICANN official's comments are not displayed
on this website. Today's tactics have been utterly shabby. But, mission accomplished:
I can draw no definitive conclusions as to what is intended and as a result this
forum will drift from theory to theory. Management by chaos. Congratulations, ICANN.