Re: ISOC/IETF *ARE* International Bodies[was: PAB nIANA facts]

[Masataka Ohta <[e-mail]>]

Camillo;

> DAVE, et al -
> 
> Sometimes I think the Internet Community is too darn
> 'sensitive' and should be more assertive about it's truly
> international character!

Reasoning used by US is that because the current internet and all the
activity on it is solely operated by US, they must continue to be
solvely operated by US.

Sounds reasonable for people in US.

> ISO and IEEE are examples of internationally recognized,
> private-sector [ie non-governmental] standards bodies, and
> have no sensitivity at all to the use of the word
> "international" in describing themselves.

FYI, both IEEE and ISOC are incorporated in US and are not so much
international.

Considering that the US justice system is like a slot machine, it is
impossible to protect US-local (or, equivalently, US-headquartered)
IANA from US lawyers on trademark issues.

Pure standardization activity may be less sensitive to the location.
However, I've heard that XOpen is now seriously threatened by
the US justice system.

On the other hand, the history proves that Geneve is a safe place
to incorporate international bodies.

							Masataka Ohta