ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Domain Transfer Complaint

  • To: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Domain Transfer Complaint
  • From: "Prophet Partners Inc." <Domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 11:45:25 -0400


Hi Danny,

See comments inserted below. This is my last post for today as I've technically hit my 5-limit posts for the day. One was stuck in limbo for 12 hours and didn't get delivered until this morning.

Sincerely,
Ted
Prophet Partners Inc.
http://www.ProphetPartners.com
http://www.Premium-Domain-Names.com


----- Original Message ----- From: "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx> To: "Prophet Partners Inc." <Domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] Domain Transfer Complaint


Hi Ted,

How do we know that the website owner is neither the
registrant nor administrative contact for IFASC.org?
Are we looking at the current WHOIS record or the
prior WHOIS record?

We know because the website owner is neither the registrant nor administrative contact as per the current WHOIS record included in my prior message. Whether he/she was at some point prior is another question.

We all recall that RegisterFly was able to replace a
registrant's contact data with its own.  Perhaps the
reseller in this case replaced the existing website
owner/registrant contact details with their own...

That is a possibility. RegisterFly had its own registrar accreditation in addition to the original eNom reseller arrangement. Did Kevin Medina switch WHOIS details for domains under RegisterFly's own registrar accreditation or under RegisterFly's eNom reseller account? Perhaps Paul Stahura or someone else from eNom can tell us what eNom resellers are capable of doing.

Before we come to a conclusion, we really should see
the historical record.  Unfortunately, even though the
White Paper caled for an "up-to-date and historical
chain of registration information for the domain
name", ICANN has never seen fit to do the right thing
to make this possible.

This is something that we can cover at the Los Angeles meeting later this month.

Perhaps someone that has a subscription with
DomainTools can offer up the earlier WHOIS record from
two years ago...




<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>