Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #656
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Friday, August 10 2001           Volume 01 : Number 656

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 21:24:11 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] "to represent the unrepresented"

on 8/8/01 3:42 PM, DPF at [email-masked] wrote:
> IMO there must be two
> stages to the process.  The first is that either the NC or the Board
> should give approval in principle that there should be a Registrant's
> Constituency in the DNSO.  This is not a complex matter and to date
> no-one has managed to argue why individual registrants should not in
> principle have the same rights as business registrants and
> organisation registrants.
> 
> *If* such approval in principle is given with perhaps a deadline for a
> detailed proposal then a detailed proposal you shall have.  Myself and
> many others will spend dozens of hours on coming up with a superb
> proposal.  However what motivation is there to do so when previous
> attempts have all ended in nought.
> 
> DPF
> --
> [email-masked]
> ICQ 29964527

David,

I believe there has been a shift in position over the past few months at top
level on issues including an Individual's consituency. That should be enough
motivation to prepare documentation and submit to Montevideo.

In Stockholm, the Board acknowledged the motion presented by the GA for an
Individuals Constituency, but requested further details be presented at
Montevideo about what they were being asked to approve, which does not seem
to me to be an unreasonable request. Following that, Karl Auerbach has
prepared a Board resolution, which could be regarded as a further incentive
to prepare some proper supporting documention. Now we have Peter De Blanc, a
member of the NC and declared supporter of an individual's constitunecy,
pressing for supporting documents, again not an unreasonable request and an
incentive to make a more formal submission through the GA at this time.

If you are prepared to spend dozens of hours preparing a superb proposal,
that is great news. Count me in. And if you want to use one of the idle
sub-lists for the purpose, it is ready and waiting.

Given the timeframe before Montevideo and the need to accomodate
longstanding supporters of an individual's constituency in any formal
proposal made, I would invite the IDNO to submit clean copies of all
relevant documents to the GA list for further discussion and debate. Of
course, more than one proposal may go forward, but ideally, we may reach
consensus following Best Practice procedures of the GA, which are now at our
disposal. 

There really is no excuse for not producing this stuff IMO.

Regards,
Joanna 

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 13:56:37 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] "to represent the unrepresented"

At 07:42 9/08/01 +1200, DPF wrote:

>*If* such approval in principle is given with perhaps a deadline for a
>detailed proposal then a detailed proposal you shall have.  Myself and
>many others will spend dozens of hours on coming up with a superb
>proposal.

Bravo!
This new proposal will have the benefit of having many elements that have 
been debated and critiqued already by many parties, old and new to the effort.

>However what motivation is there to do so when previous
>attempts have all ended in nought.

Unflattering things have been said about such motivation.
I would also prefer to see the rational motivation of people who are 
committed to work towards a clear and attainable goal.

- --Joop--
the Cyberspace Association.
(www.idno.org)
The Polling Booth
www.democracy.org.nz/vote1/

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 22:46:56 -0700 
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] "to represent the unrepresented"

> From: Joop Teernstra [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 6:57 PM

> >However what motivation is there to do so when previous
> >attempts have all ended in nought.
> 
> Unflattering things have been said about such motivation.
> I would also prefer to see the rational motivation of people who are 
> committed to work towards a clear and attainable goal.

... as long as the goal quits moving ...

I'm sort of in similar opinion as DPF here.
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:21:05 -0400
From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Joker.com filing "common law" .info claims

John,

It is a common misconception that registrars are somehow prohibited from
stockpiling. There are no such restrictions in any ICANN/Registry agreement
that I am aware of.

- -rwr

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>; "[GA]" <[email-masked]>; "Dan Halloran"
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 11:56 AM
Subject: [ga] Re: Joker.com filing "common law" .info claims

> Russ,
>
> What I don't understand about this is that the registrars' operating
> agreement with ICANN is supposed to prohibit them from stockpiling domains
> for their own benefit.
>
> I realize that ICANN has its hands full, busily maintaining Internet
> stability all day, but does anyone there monitor registrar compliance with
> the accreditation agreement?  Or care?
>
> There would not appear to be any incentive on ICANN's part to do anything
> about, though.  ICANN is not an aggrieved party to registrar accreditation
> violations, and it will be a cold day in a hot place if any registrar were
> ever to get its ticket yanked.  Won't happen.  It is one of those jobs
like
> monitoring dispute resoluton service provider compliance - nice idea, but
> where's the incentive to actually do it?
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 06:58:33 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Requesting Input from the Constituencies

- --part1_ad.ea2599a.28a3c6d9_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear Names Council representatives,

The General Assembly is a cross-constituency meeting place.  Under discussion 
is an initiative to establish a new constituency to properly represent 
individuals.  It would be helpful to our discussions if we knew the position 
of each constituency regarding this matter.  We ask you to confer with your 
membership and to advise accordingly.  

At every plenary session of the Assembly, the constituencies are invited to 
speak to the Assembly and to report on issues and matters that concern the 
Internet community, the constituency, and the DNSO.  Such dialogue should 
occur not only at full sessions of the DNSO, but rather as required to deal 
with topics being evaluated.  Please consider this to be a formal invitation 
to now address the GA with respect to this initiative.   Your input will be 
highly valued and appreciated.

What position does your constituency take with regard to the establishment of 
a new constituency to better represent individuals?   We look forward to 
hearing your comments.

- --part1_ad.ea2599a.28a3c6d9_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>Dear Names Council representatives,
<BR>
<BR>The General Assembly is a cross-constituency meeting place. &nbsp;Under discussion 
<BR>is an initiative to establish a new constituency to properly represent 
<BR>individuals. &nbsp;It would be helpful to our discussions if we knew the position 
<BR>of each constituency regarding this matter. &nbsp;We ask you to confer with your 
<BR>membership and to advise accordingly. &nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>At every plenary session of the Assembly, the constituencies are invited to 
<BR>speak to the Assembly and to report on issues and matters that concern the 
<BR>Internet community, the constituency, and the DNSO. &nbsp;Such dialogue should 
<BR>occur not only at full sessions of the DNSO, but rather as required to deal 
<BR>with topics being evaluated. &nbsp;Please consider this to be a formal invitation 
<BR>to now address the GA with respect to this initiative. &nbsp;&nbsp;Your input will be 
<BR>highly valued and appreciated.
<BR>
<BR>What position does your constituency take with regard to the establishment of 
<BR>a new constituency to better represent individuals? &nbsp;&nbsp;We look forward to 
<BR>hearing your comments.</FONT></HTML>

- --part1_ad.ea2599a.28a3c6d9_boundary--
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:36:16 -0400
From: [email-masked] (admin)
Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Joker.com filing "common law" .info claims

>John,

>It is a common misconception that registrars are somehow prohibited from
>stockpiling. There are no such restrictions in any ICANN/Registry agreement
>that I am aware of.

>-rwr

In the original registrar agreement ICANN required the registrars to follow
a consensus policy which is to be developed by ICANN.

Section I-9 of the historical agreement states:

"9. Registrar shall abide by any ICANN-adopted policy prohibiting or
restricting warehousing of or speculation in domain names by registrars."

However, even though there has been quite a number of requests for such a
policy to be developed, ICANN has refused to come up with a policy.  This is
another example pointing out the fact that there is no bottom-up consensus
process within ICANN.  ICANN has move forward with lotteries, UDRP policies,
and flawed Sunrise provisions but they cannot come up with this policy.

As for the new registries they are allowed to register domains listed in
Appendix X of the ICANN agreement.  The registrars under the new registries
are bound by the Appendix F agreements.

Of course such policies have only limited usefulness since the registrar can
simply register stuff in someone else's name and nobody would know.

Russ Smith

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:56:12 -0400
From: [email-masked] (admin)
Subject: [ga] who handles registrar complaints?

I am still waiting for an answer.

the ICANN site states:  "ICANN does not resolve individual customer
complaints" against the registrars.

Then who does?

Russ Smith

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:31:13 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] who handles registrar complaints?

At 11:56 AM -0400 9/8/01, admin wrote:
>I am still waiting for an answer.
>
>the ICANN site states:  "ICANN does not resolve individual customer
>complaints" against the registrars.
>
>Then who does?

And if they can answer the same question regarding complaints regarding
UDRP providers, that would be nice.

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:38:48 -0400
From: [email-masked] (admin)
Subject: RE: [ga] who handles registrar complaints?

>Damn fine question!!

You see that doesn't matter.  I don't bow down before the greatness of the
ICANN staff and kiss their asses.  They then use that as an excuse not to
answer, ignore the question, etc.  The content of the question does not
matter, it is who asked it.  Of course this type of activity violates the
agreements ICANN has with DOC to operate in an open and transparent manner.
I treat ICANN staff the same way they treat individual domain holders and
they don't seem to like it.  I suggest they quit if they don't like it.

>if we had an Individuals and a Registrants
>constituency

Unfortunately the current ICANN staff will never let this happen in any
meaningful way.  They will just bring in more people like themselves and the
current situation will get worse.  The focus should be on getting rid of the
current ICANN so it will be possible to proceed with such a plan.  The only
way to do this is similar to what the Navy does when a ship goes bad ...
they clear out the whole lot and start over.

Russ Smith

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 18:41:24 +0200
From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Joker.com filing "common law" .info claims

On 2001-08-09 11:36:16 -0400, admin wrote:

>"9. Registrar shall abide by any ICANN-adopted policy prohibiting 
>or restricting warehousing of or speculation in domain names by 
>registrars."

>However, even though there has been quite a number of requests for 
>such a policy to be developed, ICANN has refused to come up with a 
>policy.  This is another example pointing out the fact that there 
>is no bottom-up consensus process within ICANN.  ICANN has move 
>forward with lotteries, UDRP policies, and flawed Sunrise 
>provisions but they cannot come up with this policy.

In this case, it's quite wel "we cannot come up with this policy" - 
since the failure concerns all levels of the process, including the 
DNSO and the GA.

In fact, trying to get such a policy may be an interesting exercise 
for the process - in particular since there may be strong objections 
by those registrars who do warehouse domains...

"Registrar warehousing WG", anyone?

- -- 
Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.org/
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu,  9 Aug 2001 20:00:52 +0200
From: "lor.em" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] [IUC] contacts for IUC

I start calling consummer organizations for the IUC projects. 
First responses are positive. 
I will inform of the results.
LEMC 

"Ce message vous est envoyé par laposte.net - web : www.laposte.net/  minitel : 3615 LAPOSTENET (0,84 F TTC la minute)/ téléphone : 08 92 68 13 50 (2,21 F TTC la minute)"

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 20:07:03 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] sub-lists utilisation

Dear Secretariat,
there is no response by our Alt-Chair who is probably on vacation right 
now. I have therefore two questions.
- - is there any cost/ressource allocation problem in renaming a sub-list so 
it might serve another purpose without a mental gymnastic for the Members 
to equal a name with another topic?
- - what would you need in term of reaquest/approbation to make such a change?

Right now I observe there is a need for:
- - Registrant Constituency preparation
- - ICANN Registrars Policy
- - Internet User Constituency preparation

Thank you for your cooperation.
Jefsey

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 12:11:25 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] who handles registrar complaints?

Dear all,

I am afraid there may be some truth to this claim of personality over content.
But I believe, wearing my socioligist hat, that this is more a matter of the
club mentality that has developed within the www/internet technical community
rather than a personal reflection on Mr. Smith.  It is a snobbery that is all
pervasive in the true digital divide.

Dumping on ICANN as a whole is non-constructive, it is akin to a minority hating
all of the majority because of the bigotry of a few.  I do not even think that
the staff recognizes that they act arrogantly.  I have met and spoken with Luis
and Andrew and I am sure they have no idea who I am and do not care because I am
not someone in the club.  but I can ask two important questions.

1. Who owns ICANN? and

2. Who can we complain to about registration abuses by registrars?

Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in answering my questions.

Sincerely,
Eric
admin wrote:

> >Damn fine question!!
>
> You see that doesn't matter.  I don't bow down before the greatness of the
> ICANN staff and kiss their asses.  They then use that as an excuse not to
> answer, ignore the question, etc.  The content of the question does not
> matter, it is who asked it.  Of course this type of activity violates the
> agreements ICANN has with DOC to operate in an open and transparent manner.
> I treat ICANN staff the same way they treat individual domain holders and
> they don't seem to like it.  I suggest they quit if they don't like it.
>
> >if we had an Individuals and a Registrants
> >constituency
>
> Unfortunately the current ICANN staff will never let this happen in any
> meaningful way.  They will just bring in more people like themselves and the
> current situation will get worse.  The focus should be on getting rid of the
> current ICANN so it will be possible to proceed with such a plan.  The only
> way to do this is similar to what the Navy does when a ship goes bad ...
> they clear out the whole lot and start over.
>
> Russ Smith

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 21:38:59 +0200
From: Alexander Svensson <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Fw: [ALSC-Forum] Audio Streaming of ALSC August 13 Outreach Meeting

Dear GA,

the At Large Study Committee meeting will be webcast
- -- please spread the word!

Some local time info:
Anchorage            --  Monday, 13 August 2001 15:00-19:00h
L.A./Mexico City     --  Monday, 13 August 2001 16:00-20:00h
Denver/San Salvador  --  Monday, 13 August 2001 17:00-21:00h
Chicago/Lima         --  Monday, 13 August 2001 18:00-22:00h
New York/Caracas     --  Monday, 13 August 2001 19:00-23:00h
Halifax/Montevideo   --  Monday, 13 August 2001 20:00-24:00h
London/Algiers       -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 00:00-04:00h
Paris/Cape Town      -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 01:00-05:00h
Athens/Cairo/Nairobi -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 02:00-06:00h
Moscow/Teheran       -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 03:00-07:00h
Tashkent             -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 04:00-08:00h
New Delhi            -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 04:30-08:30h
Dhaka                -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 05:00-09:00h
Bangkok/Hanoi        -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 06:00-10:00h
Beijing/Perth        -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 07:00-11:00h
Tokyo/Seoul          -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 08:00-12:00h
Melbourne/Sydney     -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 09:00-13:00h
Vladivostok          -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 10:00-14:00h
Wellington/Suva      -- Tuesday, 14 August 2001 11:00-15:00h

Best regards,
/// Alexander

___ forwarded message: ______________________________________________________

   From: [email-masked] (Denise Michel)
   Date: 09.08.01, 11:07:25
Subject: [ALSC-Forum] Audio Streaming of ALSC August 13 Outreach Meeting

The ALSC invites all interested individuals (with the requisite Internet
access/tools*) who are unable to attend in person to listen to our August 13
outreach meeting on the Internet in real-time.  Instructions to access the
meeting:

AUDIO STREAMING ACCESS INFORMATION:

1. Establish your Internet connection (August 13, no earlier than 15:45
Pacific Time).
2. Launch (start) your Internet browser (make sure your security level is
set to "medium" or lower) .
3. Go to http://www.e-meetings.wcom.com
4. Click on "Attend a Webcast" (in the column on the right).
5. From the "Audio Streaming/Replay" menu, select "Leader/Participant Join".
6. Enter the "Conference ID"  8068204; enter the "Conference Passcode"
ICANN; enter "participant information" (your name and email address**), and
click on "Proceed"

*See:  http://www.e-meetings.wcom.com/webcast/requirements.php3
**This information will be reviewed by the ALSC to help determine the
utility of audio streaming for future meetings, and will then be destroyed.

If you have statements/questions to share during the outreach meeting,
please email them to our on-line forum at
http://www.atlargestudy.org/forum.shtml with "Aug. 13 Outreach Meeting
Comment" in the subject line.  We will attempt to include your comment in
the meeting.

The meeting agenda and other information is available at
http://www.atlargestudy.org/sv_mtg.shtml

Denise Michel
Executive Director
At Large Study Committee
[email-masked]
Denise Michel
Executive Director
At Large Study Committee
[email-masked]

___ end of forwarded message ________________________________________________

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 13:40:40 -0700 
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] who handles registrar complaints?

> From: Eric Dierker [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 12:11 PM

> 1. Who owns ICANN? and

Since ICANN is a CA-NPBC, that should be a matter of public record.

> 2. Who can we complain to about registration abuses by registrars?

No one.
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 16:24:36 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Joker.com filing "common law" .info claims

Jeff et. al,

Generally, Roeland's previous statement on this matter would be
correct but:

As of three months ago there were no such documents listed with the
Secretary of State of California.  Well that is not completely correct
the founding owner was still listed as the owner, and we all know it is
fairly difficult for our dearly departed to own anything.  (of course
the clerk could have been wrong that gave me that info)
http://kepler.ss.ca.gov/corpdata/ShowAllList?QueryCorpNumber=C2121683
The statement of officers did not seem to be up to date either, but then
they are not in compliance with the statement of non-profit operations
either.

So I would say it is not a matter of public record, and therefor it is whatever our
staff and board say.  And the DoC just signed a contract with these guys!  I hope the
DoD is more careful.

Sincerely,
Eric

Jeff Williams wrote:

> Eric and all assembly members,
>
> Eric Dierker wrote:
>
> > Thank you for any response,
>
>   Your very welcome.
>
> >
> >
> > WHO OWNS ICANN???
>
>   Good question.  According to the White Paper and the MoU the
> stakeholders "Own" ICANN.  However as many of us have unfortunately
> witnessed, it seems that the ICANN BoD and staff are of a different
> belief.  This seems rather contradictory to say the least.  Perhaps
> a better question would be: "Who is ICANN accountable to?"
>
> >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Eric
> >
> > Jeff Williams wrote:
> >
> > > Ross John and all assembly members,
> > >
> > > Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
> > >
> > > > John,
> > > >
> > > > It is a common misconception that registrars are somehow prohibited from
> > > > stockpiling. There are no such restrictions in any ICANN/Registry agreement
> > > > that I am aware of.
> > >
> > >   None that I am aware of either.  None the less John's point is still
> > > well taken as the ICANN BoD and staff have oversight responsibilities
> > > under the MoU, which is a contractual agreement with the NTIA.
> > > In addition the stakeholders have predominantly and frequently
> > > found that the preactice of stockpiling Domain Names is not
> > > desired.  Yet the ICANN BOD and staff have continued to turn
> > > a blind eye to this practice by some.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -rwr
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]>
> > > > To: <[email-masked]>; "[GA]" <[email-masked]>; "Dan Halloran"
> > > > <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
> > > > Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 11:56 AM
> > > > Subject: [ga] Re: Joker.com filing "common law" .info claims
> > > >
> > > > > Russ,
> > > > >
> > > > > What I don't understand about this is that the registrars' operating
> > > > > agreement with ICANN is supposed to prohibit them from stockpiling domains
> > > > > for their own benefit.
> > > > >
> > > > > I realize that ICANN has its hands full, busily maintaining Internet
> > > > > stability all day, but does anyone there monitor registrar compliance with
> > > > > the accreditation agreement?  Or care?
> > > > >
> > > > > There would not appear to be any incentive on ICANN's part to do anything
> > > > > about, though.  ICANN is not an aggrieved party to registrar accreditation
> > > > > violations, and it will be a cold day in a hot place if any registrar were
> > > > > ever to get its ticket yanked.  Won't happen.  It is one of those jobs
> > > > like
> > > > > monitoring dispute resoluton service provider compliance - nice idea, but
> > > > > where's the incentive to actually do it?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > John
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > > > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > > > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > > Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
> > > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> > > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > > E-Mail [email-masked]
> > > Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
> > > Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> Regards,
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail [email-masked]
> Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 20:51:09 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS REJECT ICANN'S ONE ROOT 'POLICY' 

- --part1_3b.188d0768.28a489fd_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Quoted from Judith Oppenheimer's icbtollfree.com (by permission):

"Republican and Democratic leaders of the House Energy & Commerce Committee 
and the Internet Subcommittee tell the Department of Commerce they "expect 
that ICANN will act without discrimination or bias against any worthy 
applicant, including those applicants from the last selection round as well 
as those organizations that have opted to utilize alternative roots to 
propagate their TLDs." "

...Yet another good reason to withdraw ICP-3. 

    

 

- --part1_3b.188d0768.28a489fd_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Quoted from Judith Oppenheimer's icbtollfree.com (by permission):
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Times New Roman" LANG="0">"Republican and Democratic leaders of the House Energy &amp; Commerce Committee 
<BR>and the Internet Subcommittee tell the Department of Commerce they "expect 
<BR>that ICANN will act without discrimination or bias against any worthy 
<BR>applicant, including those applicants from the last selection round <I>as well 
<BR>as those organizations that have opted to utilize <B>alternative roots</B></I> to 
<BR>propagate their TLDs." "
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">...Yet another good reason to withdraw ICP-3. </FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Times New Roman" LANG="0">
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Times New Roman" LANG="0">
<BR>    
<BR>    
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR> 
<BR>    
<BR>    
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

- --part1_3b.188d0768.28a489fd_boundary--
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 18:43:03 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS REJECT ICANN'S ONE ROOT 'POLICY'

- --------------0053F037C2FDE4CF2C400AF7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Danny,

How does this happen?

"
   8.A Watchdog Committee has been formed to police the nomination
process to help detect and cure any instances of fraudulent activity in
connection with the nomination process.

     Any instances of fraudulent nominations should be reported to this
committee at the following email address: [email-masked], with a
copy to the Names Council at [email-masked], This committee and the
Names Council shall have the sole discretion as to how to deal with any
such reported activity.

     Watchdog Committee list archive is at
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-watchdog/Arc00/

     The members to the Watchdog Committee in 2001 election are:
          Roberto Gaetano
          Harald Alvestrand
          Kent Crispin
          Dany Vandromme
          Alexander Svensson
          Izumi Aizu

Come on this is nasty and a reflection of old boy networking.  There is
no way these gentlemen reflect the GA as it stands today.  They are
watchdogs all right of the old guard and that is what got us into this
mess.

Sincerely,
Eric

[email-masked] wrote:

> Quoted from Judith Oppenheimer's icbtollfree.com (by permission):
>
> "Republican and Democratic leaders of the House Energy & Commerce
> Committee
> and the Internet Subcommittee tell the Department of Commerce they
> "expect
> that ICANN will act without discrimination or bias against any worthy
> applicant, including those applicants from the last selection round as
> well
> as those organizations that have opted to utilize alternative roots to
>
> propagate their TLDs." "
>
> ...Yet another good reason to withdraw ICP-3.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

- --------------0053F037C2FDE4CF2C400AF7
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Danny,
<p>How does this happen?
<p>"
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp; 8.A Watchdog Committee has been formed to police the nomination
process to help detect and cure any instances of fraudulent activity in
connection with the nomination process.
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Any instances of fraudulent nominations should
be reported to this committee at the following email address: [email-masked],
with a copy to the Names Council at [email-masked], This committee and
the Names Council shall have the sole discretion as to how to deal with
any such reported activity.
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Watchdog Committee list archive is at <A HREF="http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-watchdog/Arc00/">http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-watchdog/Arc00/</A>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The members to the Watchdog Committee in 2001
election are:
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Roberto Gaetano
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Harald Alvestrand
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Kent Crispin
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Dany Vandromme
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Alexander Svensson
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Izumi Aizu
<p>Come on this is nasty and a reflection of old boy networking.&nbsp;
There is no way these gentlemen reflect the GA as it stands today.&nbsp;
They are watchdogs all right of the old guard and that is what got us into
this mess.
<p>Sincerely,
<br>Eric
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<p>[email-masked] wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE><font face="Arial"><font size=+0>Quoted from Judith
Oppenheimer's icbtollfree.com (by permission):</font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><font size=+0>"Republican
and Democratic leaders of the House Energy &amp; Commerce Committee</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><font size=+0>and
the Internet Subcommittee tell the Department of Commerce they "expect</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><font size=+0>that
ICANN will act without discrimination or bias against any worthy</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><font size=+0>applicant,
including those applicants from the last selection round <i>as well</i></font></font></font>
<br><i><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><font size=+0>as
those organizations that have opted to utilize <b>alternative roots</b></font></font></font></i><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><font size=+0>
to</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><font size=+0>propagate
their TLDs." "</font></font></font>
<p><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=+0>...Yet another
good reason to withdraw ICP-3.</font></font></font>
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;</blockquote>
</html>

- --------------0053F037C2FDE4CF2C400AF7--

- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #656
************************