<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>Michael Roberts &#45; CircleID</title>
		<link>http://www.circleid.com/</link>
		<description>Postings from Michael Roberts on CircleID</description>
		<dc:language>en</dc:language>
		<dc:rights>Copyright 2008, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
		<dc:date>2007-03-14T10:58:00-08:00</dc:date>
		

		
		<item>
			<title> The Real Problem with dot-XXX (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/real_problem_with_dot_xxx</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/real_problem_with_dot_xxx</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Shakespeare has Marcellus say in Act 1 of Hamlet, "Something's rotten in the state of Denmark." ...Milton Mueller, in his recent post to this site, would have us believe that since ICANN's Board long ago agreed that ICM's application for dot-xxx registry satisfied its own criteria for a sponsored TLD, then the only explanation for all the delay is, "I'm beginning to think that ICANN's approach to TLD approval was cooked up by a demented sergeant from Abu Ghraib." Milton goes on to assert that ICM's claim on dot-xxx is protected by the 1st Amendment. If this is so, then why after more than six years of discussion, is dot-xxx still raising such a fuss? <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/real_problem_with_dot_xxx">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2007-03-14T10:58:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title> The Villain in the ICANN-VeriSign Struggle is the U.S. Government (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/the_villain_in_the_icann_verisign_struggle</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/the_villain_in_the_icann_verisign_struggle</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ICANN Board Chair Vint Cerf now works for a company whose motto is, "Do No Evil." So how could Vint and his fellow board members be engaged in a massive capitulation to the enterprise greed of dot-com operator VeriSign? The story of how the Internet community got to its current impasse over the future of the ICANN-VeriSign relationship is overly complicated but the bottom line is that we are suffering from woes created by the U.S. Government with the best of intentions over the past fifteen years. And only the government has the capacity to stop equivocating and do the right thing for all of us. The road to hell is paved with good intentions... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/the_villain_in_the_icann_verisign_struggle">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2006-02-20T07:15:01-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
	</channel>
</rss>