morning all

>However I want to express my disappointment that Michael Malone has
>sought to achieve through court action what he has not been able to
>achieve through the DNS Forum, which is the Internet industry's
>self-regulating forum.

 I thought the DNS Forum was the body formed to setup the internet
 industry's self-regulating body, not a forum to regulate the dns
 process. I dont believe at the moment there is any path of
 recourse through the dns forum. I could be wrong. 

>Tactics of litigation will only add to the costs of the Domain Name
>System, and will ultimately be reflected in higher fees to end users.

 will any dispute which goes to court result in fee rises? is this kind
 of threat designed to put people off disagreeing with policies in
 the absence of an Australian domain name regulating body? surely
 anyone who wishes to use the legal system to dispute any issue has
 a right to?

>By contrast, ISOC-AU and INTIAA through their relevant Directors have
>been making constructive suggestions through discussions with Melbourne
>IT over the past week on how the current dead-lines for renewals might
>be extended for certain classes of 'historical' domain names, and
>Melbourne IT is likely to agree to these proposals. 

 it's the 12th. When were you planning to announce that the current
 dead-lines might be lifted? and what are the certain classes?

>We will defend our Pricing Policy, that was introduced with the
>endorsement of the DNS Forum, strenuously in any court actions. 

 from memory, the dns forum strenuously disagreed with the march 17
 deadline.



 Max.
max§max.net.au			

 "Billions of dollars worth of the latest technology and what are
  we doing with it?"

 "Browsing"