RE: [ga] ICANN Board unanimously approves .biz/.info/.org registry agreements by 13-0

["Dominik Filipp" <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>]

Veni an all,

that's exactly the point. If over 90% comments are against the proposal
I don't understand how the proclaiming support for the bottom-up
consensus can hold any further.

But this is also about priorities. There are several serious topics that
have been known for months (perhaps years) but have not been
sufficiently taken into account.

a) It's, for instance, the persisting problem with domain
renewals/transfers. Some registrars (Registerfly, e.g.) from time to
time repeatedly fail to renew/transfer domains causing the domains to
expire. This is not only about deceitful behavior of such registrars but
also about the inherent flaws in the renewal/transfer mechanisms that
allow this. The last case being discussed right now is about the poor
guy who failed in renewing his domain name at Registerfly though he
properly paid for it. What is this? He paid but got nothing! And I'm not
mentioning the more sophisticated and insidious practices that take
place during transfers. What steps have been done to avoid this on
general basis? Is the revision of the mechanisms being considered? Is
anybody helping this guy work it out right now? Has anyone sent an
official letter (or warning) to Registerfly in order to clarify and fix
the problem? Or, just the usual phrase 'ICANN is not involved in any
dispute...' is being applied.

b) It took many months until the domain tasting practice has been
(hopefully) officialy recognized in Sao Paulo as a serious problem worth
of being addressed. Bob Parsons from Go Daddy has appealed ICANN to take
some action, tons of articles on the Internet have been addressing this
issue for months, here on the forums we've been discussing this as well,
but I still cannot find it listed among the 'current issues' on the
ICANN's main page! There are several registrars founded solely for this
fraudulent purpose. Nobody can even perform a simple domain lookup on
their sites let alone to register a name or find a partner provider
allowing public registrations for that registrar. They seem not to meet
the basic registrar criteria but are still ICANN-accredited! Have you
ever verified this?

c) Who do you think does the following section in the new .com agreement
serve

"Traffic Data. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude Registry
Operator from making commercial use of, or collecting, traffic data
regarding domain names or nonexistent domain names."

Is it registrant? Hand in hand with domain tasting this is a real
nightmare for registrants. Soon we will see all looked-up names taken
and filled with AdSense advertisement making money for the tasting
registrars and other speculators. And, of course, also for the
registries that will be paid for delivering the traffic data directly to
them. All that without paying for registration. Or, can I as a
registrant, afford to buy the traffic data from Verisign and taste names
during first 5 (10, 15, ..., 300) days for free like registrars can? Do
we want to unleash a secondary black market selling domain names for
hundreds dollars, as a logical consequence?

And I could be mentioning other things. But what I see is a priority
directed towards financial interests of some registries and registrars,
and indirectly ICANN itself. The registrants are given much less
attention. Sure, there are useful topics being discussed currently, but
the priority seems to be set up this way.

Is it then so illogical to come to conclusion that ICANN has been found
not representing the public interests?

Dominik


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of kidsearch
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2006 4:33 PM
To: Veni Markovski; Andy Gardner
Cc: General Assembly of the DNSO
Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN Board unanimously approves .biz/.info/.org
registry agreements by 13-0

... If 99% of the public comments are against a proposal, then how do
you justify saying that A. You pay attention to the bottom up consensus
on issues and B. That you are serving the public good by going against
what the public said they wanted?

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
http://www.articlecontentprovider.com