ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

RE: [ga] New gTLD Applicant Guidebook Version 2

  • To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [ga] New gTLD Applicant Guidebook Version 2
  • From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 06:50:30 -0800 (PST)

Hi Jeff,

Just to followup:

--- On Thu, 2/19/09, George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> --- On Thu, 2/19/09, Neuman, Jeff
> <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > some other mechanism taking advantage of the secondary
> > market)?  Can you
> > give me one example where a registry had actually
> seized a
> > name for
> > itself?   

Here's a better example of an allegation of a registry taking names for itself 


"In the last couple of days documentation has been lodged with the Supreme 
Court of Queensland that has confirmed that the Australian domain industry 
regulator, au Domain Administration Ltd, has invented complaints in order to 
strip businesses of their Au domains.

For example, the auDA compliance officer (Shane Honey) under instructions from 
the CEO (Chris Dispain) was told to send an email to the company Domain 
Directors regarding the domain auregistry.com.au and give them only 48 hours to 
respond prior to the domain auregistry.com.au being taken from them. What’s 
worse is that Domain Director’s has owned and operated auregistry.com.au as a 
registrar for the past 8 years!"

Is that a good enough example for you? This is exactly why one doesn't want to 
give registry operators unneeded powers, as they will ultimately find ways to 
abuse those powers. Power corrupts, as we've seen time and time again.

> In other words, was NTIA's procedure for procurement of
> .us registry services superior or inferior to ICANN's
> existing and proposed procedures?
> I believe you won't answer this question. :) If you say
> "NTIA's procedure is better" you break with
> registry constituency solidarity in managing its affairs
> with ICANN. You would be agreeing with me, and you certainly
> don't want to do that.
> If on the other hand you say "ICANN's procedure is
> better", you give ammunition to people like me that say
> "See, registry operators have taken advantage of the
> public through ICANN, and are making more money in that cozy
> club than they would through tenders." It would also be
> a slap in the face of your NTIA masters if you picked this
> answer.
> So, here's your big chance, who has got it right, NTIA
> with competitive procurements (tenders you have participated
> in and won), or ICANN?

You never did answer the question of whether NTIA's procedure was superior to 
or inferior to that of ICANN. You're too predictable! ;)


George Kirikos

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