RE: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs. Benefit s of the Few

[Cameron Powell <CameronP@Snapnames.com>]

Dear George,

To keep the misinformation at a minimum, allow me to point out your two most
recent errors.  First, as we said several days ago on this very list serv
(in response to a post by Clint Page of Dotster):

Mr. Page is in error in alleging that we have ever stated that the growth in
our revenues will be "a direct result of the new WLS arrangement with
VeriSign."  Mr. Page is apparently reading press reports, but not, as he may
be implying, press releases by SnapNames itself.  SnapNames has never
claimed that its annual revenues would increase from $3 to $20 million "as a
direct result of the new WLS arrangement with VeriSign" because it is not
true; SnapNames has, in fact, a wide variety of new products and services,
as well as partnerships, that it plans to unveil in 2002.  All of these
initiatives together are expected to lead to the cited rise in revenue.
Such niceties get lost in breathless headlines.

Second, while I'm not sure it was we who used the term "abusive speculator"
(I note that we did recently quote Bruce Tonkin of MelbourneIT on the
subject), and while we are under no obligation to respond to your
interrogations, I'll point out for the other members of the list that we
have, in fact, discussed repeatedly what might be termed "abusive" tactics
of speculators.  Pages 16-17 of the October "State of the Domain" list
several, from intentional credit card fraud to abuse of the 5-day grace
period.  See http://www.snapnames.com/downloads/StateoftheDomainOct2001.pdf.
Page 20 of the August edition further discusses a distinction between
speculators who have superior foresight in being the first to register a
name, versus speculators who have superior access to other customers due to
their preferential treatment by registrars -- a state of affairs into which
we would invite congressional oversight.  See
http://www.snapnames.com/downloads/StateoftheDomainAug2001.pdf.  We have
also recently written that some registrars are violating the terms of the
regular, site-oriented Registry pool of connections by sending through it 5-
to 10-minute bursts of high-speed repetitive queries that belong only in the
third pool.  In short, abusive speculation involves secret or even
prohibited processes to register names which are not, by their nature, open
to all consumers, and which are unfair to those left out.

Aside from the obvious fact that we do not disclose information about our
customers, it should be clear from the above that customers who acquire
names through our all-comers-welcome, user-friendly service (including those
whose names end up on the Top 100) are not by so doing engaging in abusive
speculation.  And many of these customers are trademark owners re-acquiring
names in which they consider themselves to have intellectual property
rights.  See http://www.snapnames.com/corporate_clients.html.

(All contents of SnapNames' website are protected from direct copying by
applicable copyright laws.)

Sincerely,


Cameron Powell 
VP of Business Development and General Counsel 
SnapNames 
115 NW First Avenue  
Suite 300
Portland, OR  97209 
(503) 219-9990 x229    (503) 502-5030 cell    (503) 274-9749 fax 
cameronp@snapnames.com 

Pioneering Provider of Secondary Market Infrastructures and Data Services
for Domain Names 

Cameron Powell 
VP of Business Development and General Counsel 
SnapNames 
115 NW First Avenue  
Suite 300
Portland, OR  97209 
(503) 219-9990 x229    (503) 502-5030 cell    (503) 274-9749 fax 
cameronp@snapnames.com 

Pioneering Provider of Secondary Market Infrastructures and Data Services
for Domain Names 



-----Original Message-----
From: George Kirikos [mailto:gkirikos@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 5:07 PM
To: Ron Wiener; ga@dnso.org; icann-delete@total.confusion.net
Cc: Registrars@Dnso. Org
Subject: RE: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs.
Benefit s of the Few


Hello,

--- Ron Wiener <Ron@Snapnames.com> wrote:
> I think we'd all appreciate it if you did not regurgitate all the
> content
> everyone has already read.  I've responded to everything here already
> and
> won't do it twice.  

Since you only joined the DNSO GA list recently, and I've not seen
Chuck Gomes define an abusive speculator, perhaps you can point me to
the link where either has answered. I don't want you to answer it twice
-- once will do. I have heard you say that the press "misquotes" you
often, so this provides you with a chance to reveal who these abusive
speculators are, once and for all. Is it NameWinner? Is it NicGenie? Is
it UltSearch? Is it BuyDomains? Is it me, with my fairly small
portfolio of names??? Who exactly is abusing the system, and by what
definition (and of course, show us how that definition does not apply
to SnapNames and its registration partners)?

When I go to http://www.snapnames.com/deleteprocess.html to read about
the Deletion Cycle, I see the words "Armies of Speculators" used. Since
you purport to know the the deleted domains industry better than
everyone else, I think the community would benefit from knowing exactly
who you think these abusers are, and relate them to the list in the Hot
100 that your own company provided.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html