Re: [ga] Re: [ALSC-Forum] QUI TAM

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Wow I have never heard of a Qui Tam class action but why not.

To speak for the people.

Historically it is important to memorialize that this type of suit was
established during the USA's civil war.  A time of constitutional suspension.
A call to harms to rid the world of a scourge.  The betterment of all kind
suffered mightely but was victorious.

Now we are called upon to indulge in litigation to stop the travesty which
Sotiris has laid before us and what Danny and Joanna have championed against.

So now it would seem necessary to form a group to manage this situation.  What
we need is very small contributions from us several.  Let us ponder and decide
the best course and cause of action.  This can be done.  Forces of truth will
bring about change, but let us not look on tomorrow but further down the road.

I am informed and believe that RICO and Qui Tam would work well together,
perhaps not.  Tying together Jones Day and Verisign is very interesting.  The
DoC connection is not lost if SS pushes through that a domain name is a
property right - thinking taking without due process. (remember legal
definitions of technical matters are determined by experts not law)

Let us all be thankful that we can engage in such matters when others struggle
only for life.

Sincerely,
Eric

Joanna Lane wrote:

> Please add my name to the list of supporters for this petition.
>
> Regards,
> Joanna Lane
> EU citizen residing in the US
>
> on 10/9/01 12:51 AM, Bruce Young at byoung651@home.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Stephen wrote:
> >
> >> For the record, I would be willing to sign an Amicus Curiae or whatever
> >> if a suit ever came about along these lines... not as a lawyer, just a
> >> "guy on the street."
> >
> > So would I!  Any lawyers out there interested in some pro bono work?!
> >
> >
> > Bruce Young
> > Client Engineering
> > Lockheed Martin Global Telecommunications
> > Phone: 503.466.6571
> > Fax: 503.466.6775
> > E-mail:  Bruce.Young@nwdc.ibs-lmco.com
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-forum@www.atlargestudy.org
> > [mailto:owner-forum@www.atlargestudy.org]On Behalf Of Stephen Waters
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 7:40 AM
> > To: Eric Dierker
> > Cc: Donald Simon; 'forum@atlargestudy.org'; 'ga@dnso.org';
> > 'discuss@icann-ncc.org'; 'icann-europe@lists.fitug.de'
> > Subject: Re: [ALSC-Forum] QUI TAM
> >
> >
> > For the record, I would be willing to sign an Amicus Curiae or whatever
> > if a suit ever came about along these lines... not as a lawyer, just a
> > "guy on the street."
> > -s
> >
> > On Tue, 2001-09-25 at 23:15, Eric Dierker wrote:
> >>
> >> I clipped the tail off this comet but it is easily referred to;
> >>
> >> Some of us can only look at the record.  Some of us can only trust, when
> >> there
> >> is some dispute, the written words agreed to by the parties involved.
> >> Mr.
> >> Roberts reminds me of WC Fields when he used to say "who you gonna
> >> believe me -
> >> or your eyes?".  Some of us live by the rules of a civilized society.
> >> {it is
> >> fair that we argue what this means regarding strict voting rights and
> >> freedom of
> >> speech and privacy} However no one doubts that matters such as lying,
> >> terrorism
> >> and breaking your promise intentionally without cause are wrong. (I
> >> promise to
> >> repay a debt and you give me money based upon that promise and I have
> >> the money
> >> but refuse to repay you and that is wrong)
> >>
> >> ICANN promised to act a certain way and in reliance upon this promise
> >> were
> >> awarded the contract with DoC and all its attending goodness.  They have
> >> the
> >> ability but refuse to conform to their promise.  That sucks and the
> >> perpetrators
> >> of such heinous dishonesty should be brought to terms.
> >>
> >> I have played a little research and found that John Browns Ferry brought
> >> about a
> >> great law called a QUI TAM and that Abe Lincoln signed it and brought
> >> down one
> >> of the great terrorist traitors of our civil war.  It is kind of fun
> >> with a
> >> ninety day filed in camera under seal thing while the feds look at
> >> whether or
> >> not they want to handle it with subrosa investigation.  But all in all
> >> it allows
> >> us in the GA to sue ICANN for breaching the agreement with and stealing
> >> from the
> >> DoC.  It would be fun to see if a non-citizen can join in the suit.
> >>
> >> Could one of you sharp Lawyer dudettes or dudes look into it and let us
> >> know.  I
> >> believe all fondly elected board members would be liable for their
> >> salary and it
> >> appears that Jones and Day would owe all their fees back, of course we
> >> would
> >> only get a percentage of the amounts recovered and a fully elected board
> >> by a
> >> true electorate.  My research shows that these could and would be
> >> handled on a
> >> contingency by the lawyers.
> >>
> >> Food for thought, and I hereby give my signature to the class action,
> >> have at it
> >> Law Professors!
> >>
> >> Eric
> >>
> >> Donald Simon wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am writing as a member of the NAIS team (ANGO and Academic ICANN
> > Study”)
> >>> in response to the lengthy analysis of our study that Joe Sims posted
> > during
> >>> the recent ICANN meeting in Montevideo.
> >
> >
>
> --
> 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

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