Discuss mailing list

[David <davidvargas1 AT mac.com>]

Riley

 Correct me, If I'm wrong, when you mention "The entity which filed the
application for .ing is Charleston Road Registry, which is basically
Google, but with a name change to meet ICANN policy"

 By changing the name into something more "Engineering" sounds to me it
was more deliberate on their behalf.

Unless Google play off the correct cards of owner ship by waiting for
the expiration date to happen, Then opennic efforts are fruitless.

Unless:

Is this blames directly on opennic, by letting time to roll bye on the
renewing the registration of .ing?

 Did .ing date expired and Google knew this matter and just waited for
it to mature. If there is any expiration date on the register for .ing ?

I believe in keeping .ing, and not running from it.




On 12/24/2014 7:07 AM, Riley Baird wrote:
> I doubt that the creation of .ing is intentionally trying to derail the
> OpenNIC project. More likely, it was just a lack of concern for it,
> perhaps through ignorance.
> 
> The entity which filed the application for .ing is Charleston Road
> Registry, which is basically Google, but with a name change to meet
> ICANN policy.
> 
> How many .ing domains are there? Do you think that Google could be
> convinced to "grandfather" the already registered domains?
> 
> On 24/12/14 09:15, David wrote:
>> We should stick to opennic should be following the to the letter their
>> own policy that was establish a long time ago. I smell a big rotten
>> rotten fish in trying to derail the opennic project.         We should 
>> support
>> Our leaders and supporters of opennic. ICANN it is corporate piranha, in
>> other words Government greed in neutralizing the net..
>>
>> On 12/23/2014 11:45 PM, Jeff Taylor wrote:
>>> In case you forgot, this issue was already discussed on the list earlier
>>> this year, and the general consensus was that nobody had enough interest
>>> to put forth the effort of contacting the EFF or anyone else.  If we
>>> were going to fight for it, that would have been the time -- when ICANN
>>> first announced the possibility of using .ing.  At this point its too
>>> late, it's a done deal and any credibility we might have had towards a
>>> claim is gone through lack of action.
>>>
>>> But hey, if you want to hold me personally responsible for the loss of
>>> the zone, more power to ya.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/20/2014 01:15 PM, Daniel Quintiliani wrote:
>>>> I really think someone should contact the EFF about this issue. I
>>>> don't personally care about my .ing domains as they're just redirects,
>>>> but if everyone caves in like Jeff is, they're eventually gonna go
>>>> after Julian, and if Julian doesn't fight back, OpenNIC will be gone.
>>>> -- -Dan Q
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --------
>>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
>>> You may unsubscribe by emailing 
>>> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --------
>>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
>>> You may unsubscribe by emailing 
>>> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>