Re: [ga] BULK whois (or: ICANN's Agreements)

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

Kent and all former DNSO members or other interested parties,

kent@songbird.com wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 11:30:02PM -0000, Richard Henderson wrote:
> >
> >    Does  the  Registrar Accreditation Agreement include sanctions against
> >    Registrars  who  break  other  ICANN  Agreements.  For  example, those
> >    Registrars  who broke Registry-Registrar Agreements in the .info names
> >    release...  they  are  still  accredited...  if  the  industry  simply
> >    operates   on  a  basis  of  Registrars  regulating  themselves,  what
> >    protection  is  there  for consumers from bad registrars who put their
> >    own   self-interest  and  profit  before  ICANN's  Agreements  or  the
> >    interests of consumers?
>
> What protection is there for consumers against bad shoe store operators,
> or bad restaurant operators, or almost any other kind of commercial
> entity? The legal system provides basic legal protection, and the rest
> comes from competition -- competition provides the incentive for
> commercial entities to provide good service.  This is the whole premise
> of having registrars -- most regulation comes through market forces,
> like for most other businesses.

  These types of businesses that you mention here Kent are not
even close to being good comparisons.  Shoe store operators
do not request or require or even suggest that they need you personal
and private information to buy a pair of shoes from them.  Shoe
stores do not sell Domain Name registrations.  Registrars do.
Restaurant's do not sell Domain Names and do not require,
request or propose a standard for listing personal and private
information to buy their product/service, namely food or a
prepared meal.  Hence Kent, it should be obvious to even
a a near idiot that such businesses have dynamic and intrinsic
differences such that legal precepts are different, so much
different in fact that drawing such comparisons in this particular
example of yours, is not reasonable and a non-answer...

>
>
> And there is absolutely no question that market forces have been very
> powerful in this market -- some registrars have lost lots of market
> share, and others have gained a great deal.

  Indeed Market forces in this space have been very powerful, and
to a great extent also very damaging sense the RRA has been in effect.
So much so that may Judicial jurisdictions in the US and elsewhere are
complaining vigorously and increasingly due to the additional case load
that poor regulation or "Quasi-Standards" that ICANN has imposed
upon the stakeholders/registrants..

>
>
> >    I  don't see the point of ICANN Accreditation if that accreditation is
> >    based on  technical  capability,  rather  than  rules  of  conduct and
> >    recognition  of  ICANN  Agreements.  Technical  capability  to rip off
> >    customers? In some cases, sadly, yes.
>
> Interesting.  Most people argue that ICANN has too much regulatory
> power, not too little.

  In fact neither is true.  ICANN has to little enforcement of it's own
regulatory practices and regulations, making them both a joke to some
and a hindrance to others, thereby creating more confusion than we
had before ICANN was in the position they are in now...  That's just
poor policy and practice..

>
>
> >    Of  course, most registrars I encounter are decent people... but their
> >    reputation is badly damaged by the cowboys in your midst.
> >
> >    The rules of the game for registrars should run simply like this:
> >
> >    You  want the privilege and profit of operating in this business? Then
> >    you have to accept these rules.
> >
> >    You break those rules? You're out.
>
> Nice, simple, and unworkable, because of a multitude of practical
> difficulties.  eg: by what process do you establish the rules?

  By vote of the stakeholders/users of course Kent!

>  who
> interprets the rules?

  Good rules need little of not interpretation.  Cryptic or complex rules often

do.  Use the "KISS" method, and most, if not all supposed interpretations will
be unnecessary.  Those that are not will need to be interpreted by the
regulators
themselves first, than the courts...  Just like in any other industry with
regulatory
restrictions...

>  what form of due process do you put in place to
> deal with people who maliciously accuse registrars?

  If it can be established that the actions of any registrant/user
is malicious in nature that should be and usually is obvious.  Hence
the regulator can recommend a number of remedies if said remedies
are so established.  In ICANN's case almost no remedies are in
in place or documented for such a situation.  Again a poor application
of policy making on the part of ICANN...

>
>
> >    Contract. Sign.
>
> Lawsuit.
> --
> 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 LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801


--
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