Anti-trust Investigation of Network Solutions (fwd)

Carl 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 misleading that some one ought to
come out to force a change.

A minor point -- the "Myth" quotation is from NSI's web site, not from the

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?

Well, the prospectus is dated July 3, 1997. I did a text search on the SEC
filing and did not see any mention of the NTIA notice.

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.

That, or maybe NSF would get forced to write The Letter (the one that says
NSI has to hand over the database to some new administrator) some time
prior to April of 1998.

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

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

What's more is that NSI didn't invent or otherwise originate .com. NSI
merely landed a five-year contract to administer it, and happened to be
standing there when it became trendy. As I recall, .com was previously
administered by SRI.