Re: [ga] Re: ICANN & transfers

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

Don and all assembly members,

Don Brown wrote:

> Wednesday, July 31, 2002, 4:01:15 AM, vinton g. cerf <vinton.g.cerf@wcom.com> wrote:
> vgc> At 05:31 PM 7/31/2002 +1200, Joop Teernstra wrote:
> >>At 09:37 p.m. 30/07/2002 -0400, vinton g. cerf wrote:
> [SNIP]
> >>>It looks so me as if we need something more refined than dis-
> >>>accreditation as the principal tool providing incentive to adhere
> >>>to contract terms.
> >>
> >>fines?
> >>
> >>And to whom will the cost of both the policing and the compliance be passed on?
> >>--Joop
>
> vgc> that's one of the reasons there probably are no more refined mechanisms
>
> You're saying that ICANN intentionally set themselves up as a paper
> tiger and intentionally circumscribed their contractual rights because
> of doubts over potential, future funding issues?  That makes absolutely
> no business sense or common sense.

  Sounds allot like what Worldcom and Enron has done.  Funny
how history, especially sense one of the Worldcom Executives
is also and ICANN BoD member, repeats itself...  This smells
allot like a COI complication of this problem...  But none the
less Don, your absolutely right here.  This comment from Vint
makes no business sense at all and no common sense either...

>
>
> Furthermore, this has nothing to do with the costs of policing, (which
> I fail to see a requirement for, anyway) or the costs of contract
> compliance or even the costs of contract administration.
>
> In contrast, this a contractual performance issue, where the other
> party is INTENTIONALLY performing contrary to contractual requirements
> and in TOTAL DISREGARD to its obligations under the contract.

  Indeed!  To me anyway as well as a number of our members,
such continued practice by any registrar justifies their accreditation
to be revoked immediately...

>
>
> Are you telling us that ICANN has no contractual rights to require
> specific performance under its contracts?t

  Sounds like that is what Vint is saying.  But who can really tell...

>
>
> ICANN's continued inaction to rectify this transfer problem is a
> disservice to all of the other Registrars who are compliant and it is
> particularly a disservice to the grass-roots domain Registrants who
> are being punished and deceived.

  ICANN is a disservice to the stakeholders/users and has been almost
from the beginning.

>
>
> Thanks,
>
> ----
> Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA     Internet Concepts, Inc.
> donbrown_l@inetconcepts.net         http://www.inetconcepts.net
> PGP Key ID: 04C99A55              (972) 788-2364  Fax: (972) 788-5049
> Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
> ----
>
> --
> 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 124k members/stakeholders 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