Verisign vs. ICANN

OK, I have obviously missed something here... I know that the courts


the original complaint against ICANN, but what has happened since,

and what i

s this about some conspiracy? Are they trying to say that users of

the anti-Si

teFinder BIND patch are conspirators?

No -- but the easiest thing to do is to read the amended complaint,
which is linked-to from ICANN's home page.

It never ceases to amaze me that some companies will move forward with
actions that they know will give them a horrible reputation. Does the
potential for short-term financial gain outweigh the benefits of a good
long-term reputation? Verisign, SCO, and Postini come to mind as

I can't stand the current spam filtering/AV email service that we use
right now (Mailwatch...ugh.), but should we change to Postini--a
supposedly superior service--knowing how slimy some of their actions
have been? That's a rhetorical question, of course, but I think it makes
the point. I prefer to do business with good companies with good
products, not bad companies with good products.


Hmm... I'm not going to try to defend Verisign (or ICANN for that matter),
but will note that the decision to engage in litigation is often not optional...

In many areas of law, failure to act to diligently against infringement can
effectively preclude you from pursuing legal recourse in the future. So,
companies can find easily find themselves having to file legal actions
simply to maintain their right to do so. Also, while drastic, filing suit
doesn't preclude adults getting together and working out the the matter
before anything makes it to court. It's legal action without any real
meaningful attempt to meet and settle in advance which deserves a
bad reputation.


  Also, while drastic, filing suit
doesn't preclude adults getting together and working out the the matter
before anything makes it to court.

Having been a part of a few large lawsuits here, I can say that many judges
will force at least a conversation between signatories of both parties (not
just attorney's) before getting to trial. It even helps sometimes.


Hmm the volumes and costs involved are more than a short term financial gain
imho, I'd say this represented long term large income and pretty easy money too.

(imho) I'd also say that you overestimate the bad reputation.. the nanog
community isnt that large when you consider the global market using verisign for
various services, and often commercial decisions to use verisign are made by
non-technical folks not on nanog

if i was a commercial vp at verisign, i'd probably be thinking in a similar
manner, they are in a unique position and unique sales points means big money in
this marketplace


(anti-flame disclaimer - i'm not a commerical person, and my logic only outlines
the reasoning behind having as neutral a body as possible operating these kind
of services)