Decius wrote:
] ] But Sclavos also said he thinks much of the fury against
] ] VeriSign originates with companies that compete in the
] ] retail sale of domain names. Severing that part of the
] ] business could, in theory, blunt some of the critics.
]
] Verisign is pursuing this for another reason, which is not
] discussed in this article. Most of the restrictions on
] their management of the tlds which were referenced in ICANN's
] demand that SiteFinder be shutdown are restrictions on
] anti-competitive behavior vis-a-vis other domain name
] registrars. If Verisign is NOT a domain name registrar then
] they don't need to worry about creating a level playing field
] between the access they have, and the access that other domain
] name registrars have. Many of the restrictions on their
] activity in the ICANN contracts would go away.
]
] Its hard to say if this move is specifically directed at
] making SiteFinder legal, or if Verisign has any other tricks
] waiting in the wings if the contractual concerns with
] SiteFinder are resolved in their favor. What IS clear is that
] this is an important move in the fight over SiteFinder, and
] its implications could be significant for those who don't wish
] to see the "service" restarted.

Who is NetSol's .com/.net contract with? Dept. of Commerce? How about not renew it or take it away from them?

It is *crazy* that .com/.net should be run by a for-profit company which will be incented to do dumbass things like sitefinder ... it should be operated by a non-profit/non-government organization, overseen by ICANN/IAB/IETF/etc.

And how much is being able to run sitefinder really worth to verisign, anyway? Is it really worth getting involed in a nasty legal battle with ICANN and *making everyone that actually runs the net hate them*??

RE: Verisign to sell off Network Solutions, keep tlds