IP: Rutt Report #1 - An Introduction

[Dave Farber <farber@cis.upenn.edu>]

>From: "Rutt, Jim" <JRutt@netsol.com>
>To: "'Dave Farber'" <farber@cis.upenn.edu>
>Subject: Rutt Report #1 - An Introduction
>Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 20:11:02 -0400
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
>
>[for posting to the IP list]
>
>Dear Fellow Netizens:
>
>As you may have heard, last month I joined Network Solutions, Inc. as CEO.
>For those of you who don't know, Network Solutions (with the help of our
>many distribution partners) registers names for the com, net and org domains
>on the Internet.  Domain names are the unique identifiers (such as
>jimrutt.com, viperclub.org, aol.com, etc.) that labels Net resources in ways
>that humans can more easily remember (under the surface, the computers use
>numbers like  198.41.0.196 to talk to each other).  Through this role,
>Network Solutions plays a vital part in supporting the growth of the
>Internet and in protecting its stability and security. 
>
>I want to introduce myself to those of you in the Internet community who
>don't already know me. I want you to know who I am, and what I believe about
>this incredible thing we call the Internet. 
>
>The first thing I want to tell you is - I love the Net! I am a bona fide Net
>head who first went online way back in 1980, when I went to work for "The
>Source," one of the first consumer online services.   At The Source, I was
>intimately involved with developing early versions of e-mail, bulletin
>boards, and even e-commerce.  (I think I coined the expression "snail mail"
>- cite: January 1981 The Source "Post" bulletin board system - but claims of
>earlier usage welcomed!).   I was the inventor of The Source's "User
>Publishing" program that allowed our customers to publish their own
>materials on the network, a precursor in some ways to today's personal Web
>sites.  I was also Godfather for Harry Steven's PARTICIPATE offering, one of
>the first operational many-to-many computer conferencing environments.
>
>I left The Source in 1982 to co-found Business Research Corporation, which
>created several successful online information products for the investment
>community including Investext and First Call.  Meanwhile, I became a
>habitual CompuServe user, participating in numerous SIGs, CompuServe's
>version of bulletin boards.  I was also a regular in MegaWars III as well.
>I wrote one of the first PC software combat front ends for Megawars. If any
>of you were bushwhacked on reset night by "Mother Fletche," ship 4726, that
>was me!
>
>My next home in cyberspace starting in 1989 was The WELL (www.well.com), the
>pioneering many-to-many computer conferencing system that arose from the
>Whole Earth Review and Catalog. It was on The WELL  that  The Electronic
>Frontier Foundation was thought up.  I was part of the startup group and
>became member number seven or so.  While I don't agree with everything they
>say, I've been proud to be an EFF member ever since.  It was on The WELL
>that I became a regular user of the Internet proper.  Before long, to get to
>The WELL more efficiently, I became a customer of NETCOM, one of the very
>first commercial ISPs. This  put me on  the Internet, mainline.  Later,  I
>was one of Bill Schrader's first customers for a full UUCP feed at PSI.
>While I mostly participated in misc.rural and comp.lang.perl, I found the
>evolution of the alt.* hierarchy fascinating.
>
>In 1992, I took my Net experiences back into the commercial world. I helped
>transform The Thomson Corporation (www.thomcorp.com) from a
>big-but-somewhat-stodgy publishing company into an aggressive, Net-oriented
>information company.  I started Thomson Labs in 1994 with a major focus on
>the Internet and related technologies.  By 1998,  well over $2 billion of
>Thomson's revenue was from electronic products.  A major transformation for
>a company whose previous core competency had been stamping ink on dead
>trees!  I was Chief Technology Officer there (and chief of Internet
>evangelizing) when I left to become CEO of Network Solutions.
>
>Why all the history?  Because I want to be sure you know that Network
>Solutions, a trusted Net third party, is led not by "a suit" who could just
>as easily have wound up at a disposable diaper business, but rather by a
>real Netizen who really cares about the Internet today and in the future.
>Of course, as the CEO of a publicly traded company I have a duty to our
>shareholders as well. There's no conflict, in my mind. I sincerely believe
>that what is good for the Net is good for Network Solutions.  We're here to
>grow with the Net.
>
>In the past, perhaps Network Solutions hasn't reached out to the Net
>community as much as it might have.  Building the robust infrastructure that
>has supported the explosive growth of the last few years has kept our folks
>focused on the technical and operational tasks at hand.  But I'm here to
>tell you that while stability, security, and service will remain Job 1, we
>will begin more aggressive outreach and interaction with the Net community.
>
>
>To that end, I am establishing the office of Internet Ombudsman, whose job
>it will be to work with the various constituencies of the Net, to make sure
>that wherever possible we are doing right by Net values.   This ombudsman,
>whom I will name soon, will have access to my office at any time.  When we
>are doing or proposing something that threatens the values we hold, it will
>be up to him or her to tell me about it. As I said before, what's good for
>the Net is good for Network Solutions.  
>
>We'll be doing other things to reach out as well.  We'll further engage in a
>dialog  on  our domain name dispute policy with the Net community.  We'll
>also continue to solicit your views on some of the most vexing issues around
>the domain name management system, like the need to take care of both the
>privacy of registrants of domain names and the legitimate needs of trademark
>owners to have access to information.. 
>
>So just what are these Net values?  What set of philosophies allowed a
>simple, obscure research network to become the central nervous system for
>the planet earth?  How does it support a myriad of noncommercial purposes
>while at the same time serve as the basis for a commercial marketplace that
>grew to $300 billion in 1998 and will represent trillions of dollars of
>economic activity by early in the 21st century? (see
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/daily/june99/internet20.htm). 
>
>I would argue that the essence of the Net value system is to be found at the
>intersection of almost total freedom with voluntary and truly
>consensus-based cooperation.   The Net's freedom provides the most
>unfettered workspace ever created by or for the human mind. Cooperation on
>the Net allows us all to work together to make the whole so much greater
>than the sum of the parts.  When the cooperation is truly voluntary, the
>free market in ideas allows the best models to prevail.  There are many
>dead Internet "standards" out there (OSI anybody?) pronouncements by
>self-designated net-gods that folks on the Net community rejected.  They
>were dead on arrival.  This is as it should be. The cooperative community
>that constitutes the Net is smart enough to quickly figure out what is in
>its own good, and smart enough to ignore the rest.
>
>As free and unfettered as the Net is, there is a need for a few very basic
>rules of the road, such as protocols for things like TCP/IP and HTTP,
>assignment of unique IP addresses, and ways to avoid collisions around
>domain names.   What I would say, though, is that the goal should be to have
>as few rules as necessary.  And these rules should always be about technical
>issues that define how the Net functions, not about policies that dictate
>what it is to be used for.
>
>Some folks may argue that this freedom doesn't produce neat, tidy results,
>and they are right.  Freedom is messy.   But it is the freedom to
>experiment, try things never envisioned before, and to do the unexpected
>that has allowed people to make the Net the astounding success that it is.
>We need to preserve to the maximum degree compatible with stability and
>security the traditional freedom of the Net if it is to remain this amazing
>engine of innovation. 
>
>Of course, this freedom does not free us from responsibility to obey the
>law.  And the unique aspects of cyberspace will no doubt require from time
>to time new laws and new interpretations of old laws.  Those laws, though,
>should be enacted through elected representatives who are accountable for
>their actions to their constituents, and whose actions are subject to
>judicial supervision.  Laws for cyberspace should not be made by people who
>are unelected and unaccountable.  History has shown that no matter how well
>intended, authority that is unaccountable is dangerous.  
>
>There's some heavy politics coming down around the Net these days, that
>could put at risk the freedom and cooperation that has allowed the Net to
>flourish. Those politics will be the subject of my next Rutt Report - coming
>soon!
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Jim Rutt
>CEO Network Solutions 
>
>Dear Fellow Netizens:
>
>As you may have heard, last month I joined Network Solutions, Inc. as CEO.
>For those of you who don't know, Network Solutions (with the help of our
>many distribution partners) registers names for the com, net and org domains
>on the Internet.  Domain names are the unique identifiers (such as
>jimrutt.com, viperclub.org, aol.com, etc.) that labels Net resources in ways
>that humans can more easily remember (under the surface, the computers use
>numbers like  198.41.0.196 to talk to each other).  Through this role,
>Network Solutions plays a vital part in supporting the growth of the
>Internet and in protecting its stability and security. 
>
>I want to introduce myself to those of you in the Internet community who
>don't already know me. I want you to know who I am, and what I believe about
>this incredible thing we call the Internet. 
>
>The first thing I want to tell you is - I love the Net! I am a bona fide Net
>head who first went online way back in 1980, when I went to work for "The
>Source," one of the first consumer online services.   At The Source, I was
>intimately involved with developing early versions of e-mail, bulletin
>boards, and even e-commerce.  (I think I coined the expression "snail mail"
>- cite: January 1981 The Source "Post" bulletin board system - but claims of
>earlier usage welcomed!).   I was the inventor of The Source's "User
>Publishing" program that allowed our customers to publish their own
>materials on the network, a precursor in some ways to today's personal Web
>sites.  I was also Godfather for Harry Steven's PARTICIPATE offering, one of
>the first operational many-to-many computer conferencing environments.
>
>I left The Source in 1982 to co-found Business Research Corporation, which
>created several successful online information products for the investment
>community including Investext and First Call.  Meanwhile, I became a
>habitual CompuServe user, participating in numerous SIGs, CompuServe's
>version of bulletin boards.  I was also a regular in MegaWars III as well.
>I wrote one of the first PC software combat front ends for Megawars. If any
>of you were bushwhacked on reset night by "Mother Fletche," ship 4726, that
>was me!
>
>My next home in cyberspace starting in 1989 was The WELL (www.well.com), the
>pioneering many-to-many computer conferencing system that arose from the
>Whole Earth Review and Catalog. It was on The WELL  that  The Electronic
>Frontier Foundation was thought up.  I was part of the startup group and
>became member number seven or so.  While I don't agree with everything they
>say, I've been proud to be an EFF member ever since.  It was on The WELL
>that I became a regular user of the Internet proper.  Before long, to get to
>The WELL more efficiently, I became a customer of NETCOM, one of the very
>first commercial ISPs. This  put me on  the Internet, mainline.  Later,  I
>was one of Bill Schrader's first customers for a full UUCP feed at PSI.
>While I mostly participated in misc.rural and comp.lang.perl, I found the
>evolution of the alt.* hierarchy fascinating.
>
>In 1992, I took my Net experiences back into the commercial world. I helped
>transform The Thomson Corporation (www.thomcorp.com) from a
>big-but-somewhat-stodgy publishing company into an aggressive, Net-oriented
>information company.  I started Thomson Labs in 1994 with a major focus on
>the Internet and related technologies.  By 1998,  well over $2 billion of
>Thomson's revenue was from electronic products.  A major transformation for
>a company whose previous core competency had been stamping ink on dead
>trees!  I was Chief Technology Officer there (and chief of Internet
>evangelizing) when I left to become CEO of Network Solutions.
>
>Why all the history?  Because I want to be sure you know that Network
>Solutions, a trusted Net third party, is led not by "a suit" who could just
>as easily have wound up at a disposable diaper business, but rather by a
>real Netizen who really cares about the Internet today and in the future.
>Of course, as the CEO of a publicly traded company I have a duty to our
>shareholders as well. There's no conflict, in my mind. I sincerely believe
>that what is good for the Net is good for Network Solutions.  We're here to
>grow with the Net.
>
>In the past, perhaps Network Solutions hasn't reached out to the Net
>community as much as it might have.  Building the robust infrastructure that
>has supported the explosive growth of the last few years has kept our folks
>focused on the technical and operational tasks at hand.  But I'm here to
>tell you that while stability, security, and service will remain Job 1, we
>will begin more aggressive outreach and interaction with the Net community.
>
>
>To that end, I am establishing the office of Internet Ombudsman, whose job
>it will be to work with the various constituencies of the Net, to make sure
>that wherever possible we are doing right by Net values.   This ombudsman,
>whom I will name soon, will have access to my office at any time.  When we
>are doing or proposing something that threatens the values we hold, it will
>be up to him or her to tell me about it. As I said before, what's good for
>the Net is good for Network Solutions.  
>
>We'll be doing other things to reach out as well.  We'll further engage in a
>dialog  on  our domain name dispute policy with the Net community.  We'll
>also continue to solicit your views on some of the most vexing issues around
>the domain name management system, like the need to take care of both the
>privacy of registrants of domain names and the legitimate needs of trademark
>owners to have access to information.. 
>
>So just what are these Net values?  What set of philosophies allowed a
>simple, obscure research network to become the central nervous system for
>the planet earth?  How does it support a myriad of noncommercial purposes
>while at the same time serve as the basis for a commercial marketplace that
>grew to $300 billion in 1998 and will represent trillions of dollars of
>economic activity by early in the 21st century? (see
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/daily/june99/internet20.htm). 
>
>I would argue that the essence of the Net value system is to be found at the
>intersection of almost total freedom with voluntary and truly
>consensus-based cooperation.   The Net's freedom provides the most
>unfettered workspace ever created by or for the human mind. Cooperation on
>the Net allows us all to work together to make the whole so much greater
>than the sum of the parts.  When the cooperation is truly voluntary, the
>free market in ideas allows the best models to prevail.  There are many
>dead Internet "standards" out there (OSI anybody?) pronouncements by
>self-designated net-gods that folks on the Net community rejected.  They
>were dead on arrival.  This is as it should be. The cooperative community
>that constitutes the Net is smart enough to quickly figure out what is in
>its own good, and smart enough to ignore the rest.
>
>As free and unfettered as the Net is, there is a need for a few very basic
>rules of the road, such as protocols for things like TCP/IP and HTTP,
>assignment of unique IP addresses, and ways to avoid collisions around
>domain names.   What I would say, though, is that the goal should be to have
>as few rules as necessary.  And these rules should always be about technical
>issues that define how the Net functions, not about policies that dictate
>what it is to be used for.
>
>Some folks may argue that this freedom doesn't produce neat, tidy results,
>and they are right.  Freedom is messy.   But it is the freedom to
>experiment, try things never envisioned before, and to do the unexpected
>that has allowed people to make the Net the astounding success that it is.
>We need to preserve to the maximum degree compatible with stability and
>security the traditional freedom of the Net if it is to remain this amazing
>engine of innovation. 
>
>Of course, this freedom does not free us from responsibility to obey the
>law.  And the unique aspects of cyberspace will no doubt require from time
>to time new laws and new interpretations of old laws.  Those laws, though,
>should be enacted through elected representatives who are accountable for
>their actions to their constituents, and whose actions are subject to
>judicial supervision.  Laws for cyberspace should not be made by people who
>are unelected and unaccountable.  History has shown that no matter how well
>intended, authority that is unaccountable is dangerous.  
>
>There's some heavy politics coming down around the Net these days, that
>could put at risk the freedom and cooperation that has allowed the Net to
>flourish. Those politics will be the subject of my next Rutt Report - coming
>soon!
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Jim Rutt
>CEO Network Solutions 
>
>While I can not respond to all your emails please send your questions,
>comments or complaints about Network Solutions policies or business
>practices to ombudsman@netsol.com