Re: [ga] BULK whois

[Andy Gardner <andy@navigator.co.nz>]

At 4:05 PM -0800 2/14/03, kent@songbird.com wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 09:49:45AM -0500, John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. wrote:
>[...]
>> So we have the regular spectacle of contributors such as Mr. Crispin, who
>> make the point that ICANN is not a consumer protection agency,
>
>Which is undeniably true...
>
>> but entirely
>> miss the point that the relevant contracts bearing on registrar procedures
>> are contracts with ICANN.  Mr. Crispin's point boils down to "if registrars
>> breach their contract with ICANN, it is not ICANN's job to care.  *You*
>>can't
>> require ICANN to care if the contracts are not followed".  Ha, ha, the joke
>> is on you for believing these contracts mean anything.
>
>Sorry, my point does not "boil down" to the above wild extrapolation.
>Please, don't try to "boil down" my points, since you clearly have no
>interest in them.  :-)

To prevent future boil down, perhaps you'd like to get someone at ICANN to
produce some evidence of the number of complaints against registrars that
ICANN has received, the categoried nature of these complaints, and what, if
any, action has been taken by ICANN?


-- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
--
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