Discuss mailing list

[Peter Green <peter AT greenpete.free>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


> If OpenNIC where to promote contracting with it's member's

Not was I was thinking of. I wasn't thinking of OpenNIC making any
contracts at all! More a separate entity, maybe classed as profit
making, that volunteers for OpenNIC. Like I said yesterday, OpenNIC
wouldn't change.

The second 'liable' part would be the T.L.D. admin'.

>>> On the other hand, TLDs themselves and their operators could 
>>> pose a different set of circumstances if operated for a 
>>> commercial purpose.

Maybe we're thinking more in parallel here.

> Again, if commercial ventures where left to a second entity (or 
> plural, competition is good right?), then any commercial liability 
> would rest with those entities, and not the OpenNIC collective,
> right?

That's what I am thinking.

Just to double clarify, I am not suggesting OpenNIC make any contracts
with anyone. Any contracts made would be between the T.L.D.
admin/company' and the person that registers any domains with them.

The relationship between the T.L.D. operator and OpenNIC would remain
the same as it does now, purely voluntary.

Example...

Person wants .fancy T.L.D. but sees I.C.A.N.N. is out of the question
and also likes OpenNIC's objectives, but knows about and cares nothing
for the technicalities of running servers etc, but likes the idea of
offering the T.L.D. to the world.

So they join OpenNIC, propose the T.L.D. and OpenNIC approve it. This
person then buys all the servers needed and employs a tech person to
setup the T1 and a T2 as well as the website where people register a
domain. They also employ people to run and maintain the infrastructure.

It's now all in place but is costing a lot of money, so they ask for
donations or charge for registration. Maybe they start off with this
as their model, but either way, they are still volunteering for
OpenNIC and have no contract with us.

Does that make sense, work, or maybe you got that and I am missing
something?

Peter

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQoXUYAAoJEPBKqeCz72c5kmkH/177h//auMmbfLDuEvRliHuw
Rg0t5JbVERXf2970ZZh1XcduvsxOiM8IgyOj1Pl//qUnJKSwmmrOy3A6VG+DnBZZ
0gZcu6jLxwcBNef0zbGUTemAE9yYaWzN7WJEJrcl44Nuy/HU7VwJcp4/JXK2Ig6z
jGffYBkZaziJmCcg3KY6DtGLVA4Aj5SoI6gAQ9MWRHuGc/uusyQ3b3NI87yiAZCL
RZZpUSkj7d/qtXmuh5lw2Mtqd1dK1gZKglXEYm3OhmJTnUbZkm0zNOtmqC/OTEb7
vM042Q0ZkXtQ0vumNeLjViIWzPjjkC1OPPT7EgyJDWiwpg0SKuPHCXiUtLXSwuc=
=Dr4o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----