RE: [ga] Ignoring the Rules

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

Jeff

If you marvel at the reticence that people have shown about participating in
Icann Task Force discussions, perhaps you should ponder the reasons why...

People try to make reasoned and informed contributions to Icann issues and
never even get replies (yes, it has now been 221 days since I asked Dan
Halloran for an answer to serious fraud issues concerning his accredited
registrars, and he has never even acknowledged the mail - indefensible).

People seek vital data but it is withheld, making informed participation
impossible (yes, where can we see your own Evaluation reports from Neulevel
and Afilias's Evaluation reports on the New TLDs, which both Registries were
obliged to submit under Appendix U of your Icann Agreement?) - these were
mandatory and available for public release, and I fail to understand how
vital data can be withheld, and then you wonder that people cannot engage in
informed participation.

People challenge Icann about fraudulent registrars and a lack of integrity,
and Icann continues to accredit registrars that have been shown to have
acted fraudulently. With regard to Registries, well you undertook to protect
the integrity of .biz in a mail to me below, and yet you have failed to
reply to me or address clearcut cases which I have shown you, where .biz
names have been stockpiled for re-sale and are publicly displayed "for sale"
at exorbitant prices. It is hardly surprising that ordinary internet users
are highly sceptical of the integrity of Icann, its processes, and the whole
industry including some Registries and some Registrars.

Have you submitted Neulevel's full Evaluation report as required in the
mandatory conditions of Appendix U? Where can we see them? How can we
develop informed opinions on New TLDs if we can't see the data?

Why haven't you replied to me with regard to the cases of .biz abuse which I
sent you months ago? Why are people here in the UK still able to break the
rules, buy .biz and advertise 100s of them for re-sale, and you appear to do
nothing about it, or explain what the heck is going on? You know I have all
the details (not to mention your entire WHOIS) - do I have to bore this list
with the minutiae?

As a damage limitation exercise, you handled Neulevel's .biz2B problems
quite well, vowing to clean up the rogue registrations, and you even deleted
some. Then you just appear to have dropped the matter (to the disadvantage
of ordinary consumers?) rather like Afilias has said it won't challenge any
more of the .info registrations which remain to be returned to the public. I
thought the DNS was meant to be available to all, ABIDING BY THE PROCESSES
AND PROCEDURES that are written down in the contracts.

You seem to imply that process and procedure are less important than the
outcomes. Well many of the outcomes have been reprehensible, and as a lawyer
I'm astonished that you are willing to waive and set aside procedure. It is
often the abuse of procedure which has led to the reprehensible outcomes.

This may be familiar practice in corporate America but it is laughable to
the rest of the world - as are the Icann processes as a whole.

Personally, I think Danny Younger's concerns about procedure (given the
history of Icann, its registries, and its registrars) is entirely justified.

And you say: why aren't people participating?

Icann has expelled the elected representatives of users from its Board.

It has called its public forums "laughable".

It ignores sincere participants if they raise difficult issues.

I have personally contributed to the debates on deletions and newtlds. But
the bottom line is, Icann exists to benefit a self-serving group of vested
interests. Icann is discredited. Icann will do whatever it wants as long as
it can get away with it. If it doesn't like what a Task Force proposes, it
just overrides it. Look what happened when it set up the group to recommend
on the future of the At Large...

What good did THAT do?

Icann just reversed everything it proposed.

So Jeff, you urge participation (and obviously that is not entirely wrong)
and you gloss over procedure. But the procedures are vitally important,
particularly when you're dealing with a rogue Board which is out of control.

Kind regards as ever,

Richard Henderson

----- Original Message -----
From: Neuman, Jeff <Jeff.Neuman@neustar.us>
To: 'Richard Henderson' <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>; Neuman, Jeff
<Jeff.Neuman@neustar.us>; vint cerf <vinton.g.cerf@wcom.com>; Legal-NeuLevel
<Legal@Neulevel.Biz>
Cc: <halloran@icann.org>; <gtld@gtldregistries.org>; <ga@dnso.org>;
<council@dnso.org>; <lynn@icann.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 9:57 PM

> NeuLevel remains committed to preserving the integrity of the .BIZ domain
> name space, the world's first and only Internet domain established to meet
> the unique needs of businesses

Um... I don't think so...

From ONE company (some of the names they registered and then put up for sale
in breach of registry rules, as I detailed to you on 28th August - names
still registered and up for sale - er... WHY? ...):

0116.biz  £300
01234.biz £300
01327.biz £300
01525.biz £300
01536.biz £300
01582.biz £300
01604.biz £300
01908.biz £300
01933.biz £300
0247.biz £300
ashford.biz £500
aylesbury.biz £500
baldock.biz £500
barbican.biz £1000
basildon.biz £2000
berkhamsted.biz £500
bexleyheath.biz £500
bishopsstortford.biz £1000
bletchley.biz £500
bodmin.biz £1000
broxbourne.biz £500
bushey.biz £500
cheapside.biz £500
chesham.biz £500
cheshunt.biz £500
chingford.biz £1000
clacton.biz £500
clacton-on-sea.biz £500
clavering.biz £500
clerkenwell.biz £500
cockfosters.biz £500
cromer.biz £1000
cuffley.biz £1000
elsenham.biz £200
england1.biz £1000
euston.biz £1000
finchley.biz £2000
goffsoak.biz £2000
goldersgreen.biz £1000
hemelhempstead.biz £1000
hertford.biz £1000
hoddesdon.biz £1000
holborn.biz £1000
hornsey.biz £2000
knebworth.biz £1000
leadenhallmarket.biz £300
leamingtonspa.biz £500
leavalley.biz £1000
leicestersquare.biz £1000
leightonbuzzard.biz £1000
lymeregis.biz £500
m11.biz £1000
m25.biz £1500
m40.biz £1500
millhill.biz £1000
newark-on-trent.biz £1000
newcastle-upon-tyne.biz £1000
newportpagnell.biz £2500
oxfordcircus.biz £2500
palmersgreen.biz £1000
peckham.biz £2500
piccadillycircus.biz £2500
pottersbar.biz £2500
retailpark.biz £1000
retailparks.biz £1000
rickmansworth.biz £2500
rochdale.biz £500
ruislip.biz £1000
saffronwalden.biz £500
sawbridgeworth.biz £500
scarborough.biz £1000
shoreditch.biz £500
southend-on-sea.biz £1000
spitalfields.biz £500
staines.biz £1000
stanmore.biz £500
stneots.biz £500
stokenewington.biz £1000
swisscottage.biz £1000
tottenhamcourtroad.biz £500
totteridge.biz £500
towerbridge.biz £500
trafalgarsquare.biz £500
turnford.biz £500
walthamabbey.biz £500
walthamcross.biz £500
walthamstow.biz £1000
watford.biz £2000
welwyn.biz £500
welwyngardencity.biz £500
whitechapel.biz £500
winchmorehill.biz £1000
wormley.biz £500

334 .biz names in total registered by this person ... I thought these were
only allowed to be registered for legitimate business purposes, and that
Neulevel would retrieve them if they were bought for re-sale at a profit.

To quote you:

>NeuLevel remains committed to preserving the integrity of the .BIZ domain
> name space, the world's first and only Internet domain established to meet
> the unique needs of businesses

It seems like the PROCESSES and PROCEDURES of Neulevel's own agreements are
waived at will...

It's better PR to be quiet and just take the money

But then again, I thought Icann and Registries existed to make the DNS
available to all people in a fair manner protected by Agreements and
(preferably) integrity.


--
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