Domain names and "The Network $olution", from The Netly News

Thu Jul 10 16:04:43 UTC 1997

Sounds like an Oligarchy rather than a congress..

I am reminded by a quote, "Communism and Fascism looks
great on paper and in theory, its a wonderful system.  Try to
put it into practical use, and watch it crumble like a house of
cards."

We have a wonderful system right now, with a quasi-democratic
way-of-doing.  Why ruin that by giving control over to "big brother" 
(in this case, big business?).

Great.. Next time I log on, my PPP session will be SPONSORED
by Intel.. Scared of that..

Just my $.02.
--------------------------------
Jesse W. Wheeler
Quality Assurance Analyst
Reynolds & Reynolds HSD-PDX
Email: Jesse_Wheeler at reyrey.com 
--------------------------------

>----------
>From: 	Declan McCullagh[SMTP:declan at pathfinder.com]
>Sent: 	Thursday, July 10, 1997 8:53 AM
>To: 	nanog at merit.edu
>Subject: 	Domain names and "The Network $olution", from The Netly News
>
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>X-FC-URL: Fight-Censorship is at http://www.eff.org/~declan/fc/
>Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 07:48:05 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Declan McCullagh <declan at well.com>
>Sender: owner-fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
>To: fight-censorship-announce at vorlon.mit.edu
>Subject: FC: Domain names and "The Network $olution", from The Netly News
>
>***********
>
>http://pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1155,00.html
>
>The Netly News Network (http://netlynews.com)
>July 10, 1997
>
>The Network $olution
>by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)
>
>        It could have been the perfect way to liberate the Net from the
>   much-reviled monopoly of Network Solutions Inc., the company that
>   handles almost all U.S. domain name registrations. Backed by
>   well-regarded groups such as the Internet Society, the seven-page
>   proposal promised to reduce prices, increase choices -- and best of
>   all, really put the screws to everyone's least favorite domain name
>   registrar.
>   
>        But a month before the curtain is set to lift on a host of new
>   domains to supplement .com and .org, the ambitious plan suddenly seems
>   as doomed as the recently extirpated Communications Decency Act. Not
>   only did just one government, Albania, sign the "Memorandum of
>   Understanding" (MoU), but the U.S. actively opposed it. So did Network
>   Solutions, after they realized with gut-wrenching dismay the
>   consequences of losing their lucrative monopoly on .com.
>   
>        Yesterday another group of MoU critics met in Washington to form
>   the Open Internet Congress, which hopes to wrest control of Net
>   governance from "hobbyists" and "volunteers" and haul it into the
>   mainstream. "I don't want a bunch of volunteers playing around and
>   trying to run the show. I don't want petty battles over who's in
>   charge and who's keeping the lights on," says Andrew Sernovitz, the
>   president of the Association for Interactive Media, which organized
>   the summit. Sernovitz envisions a ruthlessly commercialized cyberspace
>   that's safe for companies like IBM, Intel, NBC and Time Warner
>   (Netly's corporate big brother) that cough up $9,000 a year to be
>   governing members of AIM.
>   
>        The talk yesterday was of revolution. Sernovitz spoke about
>   holding an Internet "Constitutional Convention" this fall. He passed
>   out supportive columns quoting from "Common Sense" by Thomas Paine. I
>   even heard folks call the MoU the move that will spark the online
>   equivalent of the Boston Tea Party. (Led, presumably, by firms like
>   Time Warner? Since that media giant also owns CNN, you can be sure the
>   revolution will indeed be televised.)
>
>[...]
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>This list is public. To join fight-censorship-announce, send
>"subscribe fight-censorship-announce" to majordomo at vorlon.mit.edu.
>More information is at http://www.eff.org/~declan/fc/
>
>