Re: [wg-review] [IDNO] OR [IDNH] addendum

[Michael Sondow <msondow@iciiu.org>]

Cindy Merry wrote:
> 
> Michael:  I don't know if it's progressive, but it sounds like their
> attempt to protect themselves from liability if they allow you to register
> a SLD name that ICANN or ICANN policies decide isn't yours.  Maybe not
> progressive but protective?

"Protective" is certainly more like what they are doing with their
one-sided contracts.

However, all these contract provisions are derived from the
Registrar Accreditation Agreement that was signed a year ago between
the DoC, ICANN, and NSI, and which every accredited registrar is
forced to sign.

These "contacts of adhesion" are a central reason why ICANN has
created an antitrust situation. By obliging all registrars to not
only agree to the same terms with regard to ICANN and NSI, but to
agree to compel registrants to sign equivalent terms, they are
defeating a free market and competition. The result of ICANN's
coercion is that all registrars have similar or identical terms of
registration.

M.S.
ICIIU
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html