Re: [ga] Why no sanctions?

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Danny and all assembly members,

  Yes I read this as well rather carefully.  I have as of earlier today
passed it on to our legal staff for their review and comments.  We
may be planning a letter of concern with DOC/NTIA per their
review and findings given some of what you stated, and I also
observed if our legal staff finds that their may be some potential
long term problems with these violations.

  My personal view after reading this was much the same as
Danny's below.  I had also come to the temporary conclusion
that one potential reason the the ICANN staff did not take
more severe action is related to MONEY rather than any other
reason that I could deduce or otherwise contemplate.

DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

> Having read the Advisory Concerning VeriSign Global Registry Services'
> ".com/.net Promotion" cited at
> http://www.icann.org/announcements/advisory-12dec01.htm I have the following
> question:
>
> Why did ICANN choose to issue an Advisory rather than a Finding of Violation
> of Appendix I (Registry Code of Conduct) under the Sanctions program
> (appendix Y)?
>
> The advisory states:  "VGRS did not provide the required prior notice to
> ICANN of changes in its registry prices that is required by the .com and .net
> Registry Agreements, nor did it give notice and seek approval for the
> additional terms under which registrations are provided through the program."
>
> It goes on to state:  "after consultation with ICANN, VGRS has agreed to
> modify its program to establish a calculation mechanism that incorporates a
> fixed participation fee and a placement fee based on a series of seven
> different performance levels, ranging from a 5% increase to a 120% increase
> over the baseline performance."
>
> Are we now negotiating and arriving at compromises with those that willfully
> violate the rules instead of laying down the law and imposing sanctions?
> Perhaps Staff could comment on why "ICANN believes that this accommodation is
> the best outcome in the current circumstances."  Will this become Standard
> Operating Procedure?  If so, every registry will feel comfortable breaking
> any rules knowing that they then will have the opportunity to negotiate
> should they ever get caught.
>
> --
> 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

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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