ICANN: "After entering into a diligent round of negotiations with ICANN staff and granting these additional concessions to address feedback from the Internet community, VeriSign has advised ICANN that this proposal represents its last, best offer to settle the pending litigation."
Lipstick on a Clone. George Kirikos: "The revisions that were made to the proposed ICANN-VeriSign settlement were extremely minor, and the staff has, intentionally or unintentionally, misread and mischaracterized the public comments on the prior settlement proposal."
Brinkle adds this: "I'm going to put this in very big letters to make sure you can see it...."
Zach Pruckowski: "So how many of the complaints against ICANN and VeriSign represent actual concerns about the Internet as a whole, and how many are about domain-squatters losing their effectiveness?"
JJ, the Name Tycoon, asks "Who are you people anyway?"
Danny Younger: "It reminds me of Ben Franklin's comment about two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner."
It's pretty hard for me to make a judgment on any of the papers yet. The documents are substantial, and it will take at least a day a couple of days for me to digest them.
More Gruel, Please. Kieren McCarthy, writing in The Register:"ICANN portrays the changes made to the agreement as 'additional concessions' that VeriSign has 'granted'."
From the "Domain-Registration-At-Gunpoint" Department comes this news story and discussion thread on Slashdot. ICANNWatch has a discussion thread as well.
All Your Base Are Belong to Us. Red Herring in an article published today (coincidence?) entitled "Verisign's Big Dreams" summarizes investment in VRSN this way: "A bet on VeriSign is a bet on the central points of control, say experts."
