Re: Anti-trust Investigation of Network Solutions (fwd)
At 07:47 AM 07/07/97 -0400, Jamie Rishaw wrote:
This came across com-priv - I'm not supporting it in any way, this is the second thing I've seen come from the WP that gives no actual fact to back up its assertion, but nonetheless ..
-- From com-priv --
"DOMAIN" ASSIGNMENT EXAMINED BY ANTITRUST INVESTIGATORS
Network Solutions Inc. (NSI), the Herndon, Virginia company selected by the National Science Foundation (NSF) in 1995 to control the assignment of all Internet domain names, is now under scrutiny by the Justice Department for possible violation of antitrust laws.
The actual fact that backs up this assertion is NSI's filing with the SEC. You can see the filing at <ftp://www.sec.gov/edgar/data/1030341/0000950133-97-002418.txt>, and when that page is in your browser (it's a couple of hundred K in size) just search for "justice". NSI discloses the Justice Department action in that filing.
NSF intends not to renew NSI's contract when it expires next year, but the company says it does not plan to give up its responsibility for the domains it registers (.com, .edu., .net., and .org). The company is also in the process of going public and is planning a stock offering worth as much as $35 million.
At <http://www.netsol.com/announcements/MYTHS4.html> NSI says: 16. Myth: In April 1998 there will be significant changes to the .com, .org, and .net registration process. Fact: There will be no operational changes to domain name registrations in .com, .org and .net. Registrations and updates in these registries will continue as they are today with the likely addition of new service offerings. I don't know how NSI can state this as a fact, given that under the terms of the contract that will expire in April 1998, NSF has the power to require NSI to hand over *everything* necessary for someone else to administer .com, .org and .net.
Carl says: At <http://www.netsol.com/announcements/MYTHS4.html> NSI says: 16. Myth: In April 1998 there will be significant changes to the .com, .org, and .net registration process. Fact: There will be no operational changes to domain name registrations in .com, .org and .net. Registrations and updates in these registries will continue as they are today with the likely addition of new service offerings. I don't know how NSI can state this as a fact, given that under the terms of the contract that will expire in April 1998, NSF has the power to require NSI to hand over *everything* necessary for someone else to administer .com, .org and .net. Cook: Disclaimer - I am not an enemy of NSI. I consider it a decent company run by decent people. *BUT* If this is the only entry in their prospectus I consider this a very misleading description of reality.....so misleading that some one ought to come out to force a change. The possibility that you list is correct. There are two other possibilities that i can think of that are also correct. 1. The prospectus does or does not say anything about the NTIA issued NOI of July 1? This noi was disclosed in my newsletter of june 24 and basically means that the US government is embarking on its own course of action to consider whether to redesign DNS. The exact decisions resulting from this process may become known by the end of this year. Depnding on what they are, they may create a situation where the NSF is *FORCED* to extend the cooperate agreement by at least another year to allow them to be implemented. 2. one posible outcome would be to force .com under .us. The idea of GLOBAL top level domains seems to be a poor one.... one that will bring a LOT of work to a LOT of lawyers. I suspect that feedback from the NOI will be designed at putting .com out of business at least as a global domain. also there have been suggestions that .com might be phased out entirely over five years. NSI has a valuable business based on .com NOW. The idea that it will have this business *AFTER* april 1 of next year is I believe way less than 50/50. If NSI has other assets than .com to use an IPO to raisemoney with fine. (I believe they do have other assets.) To be doing an IPO founded in ANY way on their status as the proprietor of .com seems to me to be questionable. ************************************************************************ The COOK Report on Internet For subsc. pricing & more than 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA ten megabytes of free material (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) visit http://cookreport.com/ Internet: cook@cookreport.com On line speech of critics under attack by Ewing NJ School Board, go to http://cookreport.com/sboard.shtml ************************************************************************
From someone I know who is in a mamangement position with NSI I just received the following:
Gordon, take a look at the S-1 document at: ftp://www.sec.gov/edgar/data/1030341/0000950133-97-002418.txt and you'll see that the risks are very clearly stated. The document Carl quotes is not from the S-1. Cook: this person sent this to me privately rather than to the list. As far as i can tell high level NSI management has instituted a prohibition on lower level NSI management from posting to these lists. Now if they did a good job of doing it themselves, this might be ok. But point of fact is they don't do it, and when they do it is too late, too little and too defensive. Witness the fiasco during the just concluded weekend on the updates of the root nameservers and david holtzmans belated reply. At the very top it is my opinion that NSI is being run by the old line corporate control types who don't have a clue about the internet or the standards of communication expected from an internet company. Its a DAMNED shame because NSI is not a think an evil company. However by its general lack of communication....too little to late, it is cutting its throat with the net community. If it continues to operate this way it will only make its current problems worse. And no Chris Clough has not been an acceptable effective communicator for NSI. Would any NSI person recieving this response do me the favor of forwarding it to Don Telage and Gabe Batista? I should not need to be the relay for the url above. ************************************************************************ The COOK Report on Internet For subsc. pricing & more than 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA ten megabytes of free material (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) visit http://cookreport.com/ Internet: cook@cookreport.com On line speech of critics under attack by Ewing NJ School Board, go to http://cookreport.com/sboard.shtml ************************************************************************ On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Gordon Cook wrote:
Carl says:
At <http://www.netsol.com/announcements/MYTHS4.html> NSI says:
16. Myth: In April 1998 there will be significant changes to the .com, .org, and .net registration process.
Fact: There will be no operational changes to domain name registrations in .com, .org and .net. Registrations and updates in these registries will continue as they are today with the likely addition of new service offerings.
I don't know how NSI can state this as a fact, given that under the terms of the contract that will expire in April 1998, NSF has the power to require NSI to hand over *everything* necessary for someone else to administer .com, .org and .net.
Cook: Disclaimer - I am not an enemy of NSI. I consider it a decent company run by decent people. *BUT*
If this is the only entry in their prospectus I consider this a very misleading description of reality.....so misleading that some one ought to come out to force a change.
The possibility that you list is correct. There are two other possibilities that i can think of that are also correct.
1. The prospectus does or does not say anything about the NTIA issued NOI of July 1? This noi was disclosed in my newsletter of june 24 and basically means that the US government is embarking on its own course of action to consider whether to redesign DNS. The exact decisions resulting from this process may become known by the end of this year. Depnding on what they are, they may create a situation where the NSF is *FORCED* to extend the cooperate agreement by at least another year to allow them to be implemented.
2. one posible outcome would be to force .com under .us. The idea of GLOBAL top level domains seems to be a poor one.... one that will bring a LOT of work to a LOT of lawyers. I suspect that feedback from the NOI will be designed at putting .com out of business at least as a global domain. also there have been suggestions that .com might be phased out entirely over five years.
NSI has a valuable business based on .com NOW. The idea that it will have this business *AFTER* april 1 of next year is I believe way less than 50/50.
If NSI has other assets than .com to use an IPO to raisemoney with fine. (I believe they do have other assets.) To be doing an IPO founded in ANY way on their status as the proprietor of .com seems to me to be questionable.
************************************************************************ The COOK Report on Internet For subsc. pricing & more than 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA ten megabytes of free material (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) visit http://cookreport.com/ Internet: cook@cookreport.com On line speech of critics under attack by Ewing NJ School Board, go to http://cookreport.com/sboard.shtml ************************************************************************
participants (2)
-
Carl Oppedahl -
Gordon Cook