ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-nominations]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[ga-nominations] Acceptance


1a. Full name of the nominee: Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

   1b. E-mail address of the nominee: watch-dog@inreach.com

   1c. Background information about the nominee: 
 
    My employment background is in the Sales and marketing Fields and has been for the past 24 years. In 1995 I founded my own Newspaper called Most Wanted in Modesto, CA. We profiled Wanted Fugitives and Missing Children. The paper had quite a bit of success with the Wanted Fugitives but very little with Missing Children. In 1998 I Co-Founded Watchdog, a California Nonprofit Organization to focus on Missing Children and Adults. Watchdog helped through direct participation in the searches to find 16 Missing Children and even a larger number of Runaway Teenagers safely. In 1998 Larry Madden, the Father of a Boy, Michael Madden, who has been missing for 6 years approached me with an expanded idea on what Watchdog was doing. Together we formed The Kidsearch Network. See http://www.kidsearchnetwork.org   
 
    By expanding to the Internet I began to get very interested in how the Internet works and how it can be used to help find Missing Children worldwide. There was much that had to be learned from a technical standpoint in order to create a Global Alert System for Missing Children in all Countries. My first participation with how the Internet is managed and what organizations control the rules-making process was in November of 2000. I began researching who makes those decisions and how they were made.
 
    I became very distressed about the lack of Democracy and lack of respect for Basic Individual Rights for Users within this process. I also became very vocal about it. In December of 2000 I was invited to join the WG-Review looking into ways to improve the DNSO. There I saw even more evidence of abuse of the rights the Individual Users should have. I saw more of a system designed to make it difficult for Non-Technical-Savvy Users to even know about what is really going on let alone actually participating in the process.
 
    
   1d. Statement of the nominee's objectives
       in the role as GA delegate to the NC UDRP TF:
 
ICANN claims it seeks to create a Bottom-Up Consensus on it's policy making decisions, yet I have seen no evidence of it. Where they have sought Public Comment, they have ignored the comments and proceeded against the will of those few who have found their way in to participate. They were to have elected more Board Members by vote from the Internet Community, the Most Important Stakeholders. Yet again, they have not done so and due to recent posts and comments by the ICANN BoD and it's President I cannot see where they intend to in the near future.
 
    It is my sincere hope the Task Force reviewing aspects of the UDRP will reflect a Bottom-Up Consensus when it is done and passes it's recommendations to the ICANN BoD and it is my hope that if the Consensus is achieved that this time the BoD will not ignore it. I would be going in with as open of a mind as possible even though the Task Force seems to consist of those entities who would benefit from the Status Quo with no changes of real substance. That being said, I will ignore the past and treat this Task Force as if it can accomplish the tasks at hand and will not assume that it cannot.
 
    The UDRP was designed to counteract Cybersquatting. The act of registering a Domain Name that is Confusingly Similar (A Broad term IMO) to someone's Trademark and where the Registrant of the Domain Name used it for Commercial Gain based on the Good Will and recognition of the Mark or tried to sell the Domain Name to the Trademark Holder. I don't disagree with the original intent 100%. I have a problem though where a Trademark is Registered and not Famous in a specific Classification and the Mark's Owner/s believe that gives them total rights to the Domain Name in question and will address that issue given the chance.
 
    I have read nearly every case that has involved the UDRP and conclude that it, by sheer numbers if nothing else reflects a heavy miscarriage of justice in favor of TM Holders vs Domain Name Registrants. Some of these cases have bordered on the ridiculous and you do not have to be a Lawyer to recognize those cases. Forum Shopping is of major concern as is the allowance by some providers for the Complainant to file additional documents past the due date and after the hearing.
 
    One of my major concerns I do not see listed as an issue is where IP Interests who have a Legal Staff and/or plenty of money have intimidated Domain Name Registrants with less money and/or expertise at their disposal into giving up their Domain Name without a fight with threats of expensive lawsuits and indicating criminal prosecution. This is an abuse of the system that already heavily favors the IP Interests and an unethical practice by many Attorneys in this field. Many who have Clients with Intellectual Property look for these chances to obtain Domain Names and even openly advise others to do the same through their Websites and Mailing Lists. I know, because I subscribe to some of those lists.
 
    There are too many issues to list here and this acceptance has been long already, so I will close by just saying that I will represent whatever Consensus the GA has reached on specific issues and reflect their statements based on that Consensus. Where there is no Consensus or a Minority opinion on an Issue I will also see that it is brought to the Task Force and stated as whether the GA has or has not reached Consensus and whether or not it is a minority opinion or my personal opinion.
 
    I sincerely hope the opinion of the GA is not taken lightly. We are representative of the average user and perhaps we represent the Bottom in the Bottom-Up Consensus stated as what is needed in order to create policy. If this "Bottom" continues to be ignored as it has been in the past the damage that will be done for this process may be irreparable. The UDRP does not fall within the Technical Coordination of the Internet. It reflects policies and social concerns. I ask that each of the Task Force members remember that and remember we represent the Users. We may have only one voice on this Task Force compared to the many the IP Interests have but the number of voices represented by us are great in number.

 
 
Chris McElroy aka NameCritic


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>