|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Verisign on Process
-- On Wednesday, October 8, 2003 14:19 -0400 -- "Howard C. Berkowitz" <[email protected]> supposedly wrote: By Declan McCullagh Staff Writer, CNET News.com http://news.com.com/2100-1038-5088128.html "I don't want to go beyond the agenda," replied Chuck Gomes, VeriSign's vice president for its registry service. Citing concerns of proprietary information and competitive advantage, he added that he didn't think he could guarantee any advance notice of similar changes in the future. I think this is the basic problem between Verisign & the network operators.Gomes' position truly bothers me if a registry, given that it meets the formal definition of a technical monopoly, is planning around competitive advantage. The registry service should have no competitive advantage. It is a public trust, a monopoly granted with the assumption it will be run with the best interests of the Internet, not in the best interest of Versign's bottom line. I am all for capitalism, would not have it any other way. Verisign has said that we are upset over commercialization. They are dead wrong, period, end of sentence. We are (well, *I* am) upset they are costing me money and doing it using a monopoly we granted them to serve us. Contrary to their belief, they do not own and may not use the registry in any way the community feels is detrimental to the community as a whole. This is most obviously viewed as detrimental by the community. They are so adamant in their position I sometimes wonder if they honestly believe their own arguments. It has to be they either do not understand, or they are intentionally misleading the press and end users to do something they know is wrong. Any bets on which it is? Anyone care which one it is? -- TTFN, patrick
|