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

["John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <john@johnberryhill.com>]

From: <kent@songbird.com>
>
> What protection is there for consumers against bad shoe store operators,
> or bad restaurant operators, or almost any other kind of commercial
> entity?

I was unaware that, in order to run a shoe store, one had to sign a contract
with a non-profit organization in California which is the sole authority for
enabling one to run a shoe store.

Get it, "sole authority"... Oh, geez... some days...

But IF the only way to run a shoe store was to sign a contract with IFOOT,

and IF IFOOT was a public interest corporation that required, in that
contract, for each shoe store operator to do certain things,

and IF the shoe store operator did not do those things spelled out in that
contract,

THEN, yes, people would be justifiably concerned that IFOOT was merely a sham
organization which had been captured by shoe store interests to let them do
whatever they damned well pleased.

And you would sit there saying that shoe stores didn't have to follow their
IFOOT agreement, and that people who expected them to abide by their IFOOT
contracts, or for those contracts to be enforced by IFOOT, were deluded.

But you are right, Kent.  ICANN doesn't need to enforce its contracts with
anyone, and those contracts do not inure to the benefit of domain name
registrants.  It is refreshing to hear such blunt honesty from someone within
ICANN for a change.

But Jiminy Christmas, as Mike Palage also points out, we all know that the
contracts don't mean a thing to domain name registrants.  Can't we all just
stop obsessing about "protections for domain name registrants" built into the
accreditation agreements and own up to the fact that it is all pretty much
meaningless BS that has nothing to do with where the leather meets the road
in this circus?

I mean, why bother with what registrars are, or are not, required to do by
the RAA.  Nobody cares if they follow it or not.  And you are a prime example
of an ICANN supporter who becomes indignant at the suggestion that ICANN
should care if their own contracts are breached, or that it should be ICANN's
job to care if its own contracts are breached.  Bravo.




--
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