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

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    What's in .NAME? 5000+ .NAME Registrations Not Conforming to .NAME Restrictions | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 185 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    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: .name was not designed as an open tld
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Friday May 31 2002, @04:06PM (#6667)
    User #2810 Info
    A copy of the agreement can be found here. Specifically, Appendix L 3. Reservation states:
    3. Reservation

    Registry Operator reserves the right to transfer or cancel any Registered Name or SLD e-mail (a) for violations of the Registry Agreement and its Appendices...
    And that click-thru agreement you sailed past on your way to fame and fortune? Says in so many words that you can't sue them and win. Buh.Bye.adrian. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: .name was not designed as an open tld by fnord
    Re: .name was not designed as an open tld
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Saturday June 01 2002, @11:30AM (#6692)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    i honestly think i would win, buit litigation is not the answer right now.

    they are welcome to cancel my domains, so long as they also compensate my costs of registration and prove they are invalid through the UDRP or ERDRP Forums; this is the only clear and proven procedure for doing this. No registrar could get away with cancelling so many domains without riskign either bankruptcy or litigation.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: fnord- question
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Saturday June 01 2002, @04:43AM (#6683)
    User #2810 Info
    The policy hasn't changed SFAIK. Certainly the other open TLDs, both legacy and new, none doing so well at the moment, would have a beef with ICANN if they gained another direct competitor. GNR can't unilaterally change the agreement, they'd need ICANN's OK, and ICANN is unlikely to give that OK for the above reason. ICANN has also taken flak for allowing some of those it OK'ed for new TLDs to later change what was in their applications, as this was unfair to applicants who were turned down. If ICANN now allowed GNR to open itself up as another undifferentiated TLD, they'd take more flak from that quarter as well.

    While the policy does say that GNR won't screen for appropriateness, it also says that GNR can cancel any registration it wants to. So, now that GNR is aware that Adrian et al aren't following the rules they agreed to follow when they accepted the Registration Agreement, they are free to cancel their registrations.

    In Adrian's case, he registered bulk.register.name, for example, through bulkregister (I haven't checked to see if he used them exclusively, though some of his other names also appear on Ben's incompletely published list of bulkregister registered names). Here is the bulkregister registration agreement. While it doesn't have clauses specific to .name (frankly, quite a bit of the bulkregister site seems outdated, not necessarily inaccurate, but stale), Adrian is clearly in breech of various of the general provisions. He also has claimed more recently here that he is a bulkregister reseller. While I doubt that, if he is, he is also clearly in breech of various of those clauses to do with resellers. He has breeched many of the registration requirements of both GNR and bulkregister. By his acceptance of the GNR and bulkregister agreements (you can't register without accepting the clickwrap agreement), he has bound himself to their rules. Both parties' rules allow them to cancel any registration for pretty much any reason, certainly for what Adrian has done. And the save harmless clauses mean that Adrian can't successfully sue them. So the litmus test now is whether either party (and if so, which) will enforce those agreements. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: fnord- question
    by ANNODOMINI2000 (reversethis-{KU.OC.OOHAY} {ta} {D0002DA}) on Saturday June 01 2002, @11:42AM (#6696)
    User #3359 Info | http://www.ad2000d.co.uk/
    For the umpteenth time .NAME is NOT just intended for personal names - when will people get this - it is also for pseudonyms, aliases, fictional characters and trademarks.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.

  • 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