ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    ICANN Struggles With Transparency | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 3 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re:Not the first Independent review request
    by Stuart Lawley on Thursday July 31 2008, @06:32AM (#16991)
    User #4767 Info
    Hi Ed,

    i think we are actually the first entity to actually file an Independent Review Petition. I may be wrong but i think you simply indicated to ICANN that you wanted one and i guess they just pointed you to the ICDR and sat and waited for you to file.

    FYI the process is both long and very expensive and we estimate that our own direct legal costs for this will far exceed $ 1 MM plus the cost of arbitrators etc.

    Having reviewed and agreed the basic process with ICANN and the ICDR who have appointed a Case Manager, we are confident that the arbitrators will be completely independent from the parties and we look forward to their determination of our claim in due course.

    If you have any questions on the process please feel free to ask.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Not the first Independent review request by Stuart Lawley
    Re:Not the first Independent review request
    by ehasbrouck on Friday August 01 2008, @03:12PM (#16992)
    User #3130 Info | http://hasbrouck.org
    Stuart Lawley says, "i think we are actually the first entity to actually file an Independent Review Petition. I may be wrong but i think you simply indicated to ICANN that you wanted one and i guess they just pointed you to the ICDR and sat and waited for you to file."

    This is not correct. I filed a formal request with ICANN. (ICANN didn't "point me to the ICRD". They ignored me for months, than pronmised to act on my request, then didn't act.) ICANN's Bylaws provide that an IRP request be filed with ICANN. ICANN *claims* to have adopted procedures for IRP requests to be filed directly with ICDR, but (1) ICANN has never actually approved such procedures in accordance with the rules in ICANN's Bylaws for such decisions, and (2) even if they had, they would not comply with the Bylaws, which provide for filing of IDP requests with ICANN.

    As a business, Mr. Lawley and ICM Registry are, understandably, more concerned with a favorable decison that would allow their business plans to move forward than with the procedures. They may choose to accept ICANN's (procedurally improper) "decision" to designate ICDR, and may choose to follow procedures (not in accordance with ICANN's Bylaws) for filing directly with ICDR, etc. But their willingness to follow those procedures does not legitimate those procedures, negate the claims of other pending IRP requesters, or require others to follow them rather than insisting that ICANN actually bring itself into compliance with the IRP Bylaw by (1) conducting a proper policy development process to designate an IRP provider and approve IRP procedures, and (2) acting on the outstanding IRP requests.

    *Fundamentally* ICM Registry's objection is to the sunstantive outcome of ICANN's decision, not the process. The IRP request relates to the process, but its main goal is to overturn the substantive decision. Ultimately, ICANN would be able to accommodate such an IRP ruling without fundamental or procedural change.

    In light of ICM's commercial goals, the cost of an Independent review, even at US$1 million, is small compared to the profits if the IRP rules in ICM registry's favor. So ICM Registry has little reason to object to the establishment of IRP procedures and fees unaffordable to individuals or public interest advocates.

    Fundamentally, my objection is to the process, and my goal as a journalist is change in ICANN's process with respect to openness and transparency. This is much ore threatening to ICANN, since a ruling in my favor by an IRP would require major change in how ICANN operates. And I cannot afford, and would not readily "agree" to, expensive procedures. My request is thus much more threatening to ICANN's established secrecy. Perhaps that is why ICANN has been unable to condyuct the kind of discussions with me about my IRP request that it has apperently been willing to have with ICM Registry.

    Of course, by *any* interpretation, ICANN has violated its Bylaws by failing to post the ICM registry request, or any of the other IRP requests, on the ICANN Web site.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com