Re: [ga] RegistryPro allows the flood of new .pro users (none verified)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Richard and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
stakeholders/users,

  ICANN has in no way been "used" as you state below by the
manipulations
of Registrypro or EnCirca.  Unless you are assuming the ICANN BoD and
staff are complete fools and/or idiots.  The ICANN BoD and staff have
known sense the selecting of .Pro as a new TLD these games were
possible if not likely.  In fact even before ICANN was conceived these
arguments and discussions were ongoing on now defunct forums in which
several current ICANN BoD and staff  members were active participants...

Richard Henderson wrote:

>    http://www.registrypro.pro/forum/
>
> "It has come to the attention of RegistryPro that some .pro name
> holders are licensing their domain names to parties who may not
> themselves qualify for a .pro domain name."
>
> "Once a .pro domain is appropriately purchased, RegistryPro does not
> assume control over the use of that name. This includes the secondary
> market and licensing programs referenced above."
>
> What RegistryPro is saying in this message is that they know perfectly
> well that EnCirca is registering thousands of names in EnCirca's own
> name, then selling ownership of these domains to the general public
> without any checking of individuals' credentials whatsoever (although
> the intention of setting up the .Pro Registry was that it should only
> be open to people whose credentials had been rigorously checked)...
>
> And then RegistryPro appears to be saying that once they've got their
> share of the money, they will allow this opening up of .Pro to the
> general public to continue. They seem to be saying that, without
> consultation with ICANN, they are going to take the money, and preside
> over the dismantling of the intent and purposes of the .Pro Agreement
> as set out by ICANN.
>
> To this extent, RegistryPro and EnCirca appear to be in complicity. At
> the very least, you would think that the .Pro Registry would turn to
> ICANN and ask for their view on this effective re-writing of .Pro.
>
> Whatever words RegistryPro uses, they *know* that they are opening up
> a registry that was supposed to be credentialled and restricted.
>
> ICANN may have a different view on whether this respects the Agreement
> and Understanding they made with RegistryPro, not to mention the time
> and money invested by consumers who invested in .Pro because of the
> way it was defined.
>
> Were other Registrars consulted by RegistryPro?
>
> What RegistryPro and EnCirca appear to be trying to do - including
> this RegistryPro Forum just launched today... "It has come to our
> attention..." when they know perfectly well what has been going on in
> the past month... is that they are trying to push forward to a new
> "status quo" regardless of ICANN's position and the purposes of
> ICANN's Agreement. ICANN has been used and they are trying to railroad
> it to their own 'new reality'.
>
> De facto - if not on a technical detail - .Pro is being turned into an
> open gTLD.
>
> Yrs,
>
> Richard Henderson

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827