For ICANN to use such a public and blunt tool like that against Verisign (after they have diligently refused to enforce Registrar or Registry Agreements on so many other issues such as the Yesnic/Joker/Wooho .info fraudulent TM applications etc - or the thousands of improper details submitted in the .info roll-out by many people) suggests to me that ICANN is playing silly games here. It seems like something orchestrated to me.
It could even be that, after they received so much negative opinion for 'favouring' Verisign over the WHOIS plans, they wanted to be "seen" bashing Verisign in order to allay fears of collusion.
Well, that's just a thought I harbour - who knows.
What I DO know is that ICANN has up until now been diligent in NOT enforcing their Agreements or challenging accreditation..
So why the attack on Verisign, so publicly and so bluntly, when they've had a "laissez faire" attitude to everyone else for so long.
Has the penny finally dropped that if they have Agreements and Accreditation, then that also involves enforcement?
Or is the ICANN philosophy of "anything goes" - as far as the self-regulating registrar/registry industry is concerned - still in the ascendant? Is this "attack" on Verisign's autonomy just a pre-planned piece of stage management?
If they are sincere:
Will they suspend the accreditation of Yesnic, pending investigation of their 200+ .info Sunrise registrations, based on TMs which have already been variously ruled out by WIPO?
Will they suspend Wooho/RGNames for submitting 40 identical TMs for separate names in the .info Sunrise through their executive J. Lee - pending investigation?
Will they look into the Laganbach/Joker .info Sunrise registrations?
Will they investigate Neulevel's accommodation of .biz re-sales contrary to the Registry rules?
Will they take action in the cases of those registrars who actually incited fraud in the .info Sunrise fiasco and even filled in over a hundred fake TMs themselves - the customers didn't do it - the registrars did it themselves to support the fake claims?
Will they investigate DomainBank (notwithstanding that Hal Lubsen is also the fine upstanding CEO of Afilias) for abusing the Afilias rules and charging around $15000 to submit ineligible names with mandatory data missing from the WHOIS?
If Verisign... then why not all these other cases?
And why no reply from Dan Halloran on these equally serious abuses of the WHOIS, 113 days after asking him to respond?
When you look at the overall picture, this "oh-so-public" attack on Verisign (however much deserved) seems arbitrary and, frankly, staged.