"Darryl (Dassa) Lynch" 
>
> Thank you.  I do believe we should discuss all these issues,
> we do need to keep it civil however.

Casting cannibals, communists and crazy capitalists aside
for a moment, I'd like to try to clarify some of the positions
being put forward.

The facts as they are now, are that if a business or company
owns a domain name, then if the business is sold, the domain
name goes with it.  There seems to be little opposition to
this, even though, as has been pointed out, speculators can
also use this method.

At present, registrants still require a close and substantial
connection to a domain name in order to register it...  if they
are approached by someone who values the domain more
than they do, should they not be free to profit from it?  Surely
this is win-win... After all, a buyer does not pay more than
what they think an item is worth (so they've hardly been
"ripped off",) and the original owner clearly profits from the
transaction.

It seems to me (and you can correct me if I'm wrong,) that
you don't appear to be opposed to domain trading per se -
just that you are opposed to domain speculation.  Is this a
correct assessment?

If this is the case, then I'm curious as to why you are opposed
to speculators in particular.  Where similar assets of variable
value are available, they are a natural side-effect - and seems
as legitimate a business practice as any other... How do you
maintain that a future (possible) registrant has a greater right
to the domain name?

With regards to whether or not a domain name is an asset:
anything which adds value to a business is clearly an asset.
Unlike software licenses (which btw, is also an asset - you
depreciate it on your tax returns,) domain names often
increase in value over time.

In some cases, this appreciation is because of the good will
generated by the registrant's use of the domain.  In other
cases, it is simply because the registrant had the foresight to
secure the name of an up-and-coming service, product or idea.
In either case, isn't the registrant entitled to profit from the
sale of the domain?  If not, how can you justify that position?

Your entire opposition to the concept of domain trading seems
to be that some people miss out on their desired domain name...
well, that goes without saying: multiple parties want a domain,
only one entity can have it.  At least with a secondary market,
domains ultimately end up in the hands of those that value them
the most... even better: those who relinquish the domain name
get some compensation.  It seems to me to produce more
winners than the present situation.

Finally: Each domain name is unique, this is true - but they are
hardly limited in number.  To claim them as a non-renewable
resource is disingenuous.

Regards,
Kirk Fletcher