RE: [ga] OnlineNic's real address

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

I do not hold to your belief that the competition is among different 
competitors, as it were.
The competition is to have credibility and reliability. Two may coexist in such 
an environment. ICANN must struggle to establish and not necessarily enforce. A 
consistent and sound norm is optimum. People tend to gravitate, accept and 
invest in that which offers the greatest stability not that with the heaviest 
hand. Innovation should build upon and not destroy.
Today, people want governance with the highest degree of "right to rely on". We 
want this in nationalism, internationalism and right now mostly corporatism. 
Today we check to see if Jobs is still in control, Oil flows (as usual not as 
optimum) to Ukraine and any kind of stability in Gaza. The problem with 
OnlineNic and Daddio is not so much corruption and deceipt that we can count on 
but if we can count on the rules applying uniformally and stablely(if that is a 
stable word).
 
Viet Nam Lingua. This language is beautiful. It was developed in its' present 
form in the same century as the Internet. It is truly evolving as the Internet. 
Terms and practice that resonate with the culture remain. Those that do not 
recede. Just like the Internet. This term for Happy New Year follows a 
confuscian base of taking the best from cultures in both the temporal plane and 
the geopolitical frame. In short, like the Internet -- It truly belongs to no 
one and yet to everyone.

--- On Sat, 1/3/09, Karl E. Peters <tlda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Karl E. Peters <tlda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [ga] OnlineNic's real address
To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Saturday, January 3, 2009, 6:30 AM



 
All,
    What the soft handed approach from ICANN says to me is that ICANN, at least 
at some level, realizes that they are NOT "in charge" of the world's internet 
any longer. Now they are competing for market share with many forces while not 
being able to admit there is even a competition for fear the competition will 
simply opt to play on a different field altogether. This puts them in the 
unenviable position of trying to enforce rules on people and organizations that 
really don't need ICANN as much as ICANN needs them, essentially hoping a slap 
on the hand to those people will satisfy us and not have to REALLY punish them 
and drive them away completely. 
    While I do not envy them in the slightest, they are now paying for ignoring 
the fact of their replacability for so long. Having to fight a war while acting 
like everything is alright must be tough! We have been predicting this for a 
long time. Surely ICANN saw it coming too, but could not admit to it without 
admitting they had a weakness.
-Karl E. Peters, President
Top-Level Domain Association, Inc. 
 
P.S. Was your third language there Vietnamese or some varriation of Cantonese? 
The Mandarin Chinese comes to something like "Xin nian quai le" in the PinYin. 
Chinese (Lunar) New Year will fall at the end of January this year, the 26th I 
believe. That is the one that China REALLY celebrates. Been there, done that. 
 


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [ga] OnlineNic's real address
From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, January 02, 2009 9:57 pm
To: dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx







Happy New Year, Prosperos Anos, Chuc Mung Nam Moi.
 
What a great year to be alive. As the stock markets like to say we have no 
where to go but up!!
 
Now that is what I call a response to a question.
 
I think you nailed it on the head. ICANN, needs to require transparency to play 
and they need to enforce their rules.
 
Shananigans are ok for excercise of rights, but out of bounds for enjoyment of 
economic priviledge.
 
>From a corporate psycho perspective: I think ICANN feels too insecure in their 
>position. They seem to lack the metaphoric balls to demand anything of anyone, 
>so they excercise passive aggressive planned incompetence. These guyettes and 
>gals need some confidence to stand up and kick some of these immoral thieving 
>bastards asses. We either need a transfusion into our status quo or some new 
>blood to bring in the new year.

--- On Fri, 1/2/09, Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ga] OnlineNic's real address
To: hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Friday, January 2, 2009, 2:20 PM

Hello Eric, Re: Who cares and why... you may want to have a look at the 
cybersquatting case that resulted in a $33.15 million judgment. 
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-candce/case_no-3:2008cv02832/case_id-204081/As
 it turns out, OnlineNic in China is the equivalent of GoDaddy in the U.S. -- 
it is China's largest registrar. OnlineNic has actively engaged in 
cybersquatting and it still awaits the results of additional lawsuits filed by 
Microsoft and Yahoo. More importantly, it has close to 1.2 million 
registrations under management, which means that registrants are at risk if the 
firm goes under. Over the years we have seen numerous ICANN registrars build 
their own portfolios and involve themselves in typosquatting/cybersquatting 
activities -- see for example exhibit 4 at 
http://www.domainnamenews.com/images/dell_doc2.pdf.
 

On occasion, the courts have locked down their ability to function as a
registrar -- see for example http://www.domaindoorman.com/lawsuit.htmThe last 
thing that we need is ICANN tacitly endorsing cybersquatting by failing to yank 
the accredition of such firms, and it sure doesn't help when ICANN contributes 
to shenanigans that allow a registrar to conceal its primary place of business. 
If ICANN really believed in transparency, it should publish registrar 
accreditation application details in full for public scrutiny. Happy New Year 
to all. Danny