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    This discussion has been archived.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 Rips VeriSign Over Whois Violations | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 70 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: It's A Sham ...
    by Anonymous on Tuesday September 03 2002, @12:29PM (#8980)
    ICANN is just posing, taking a non-issue, trying to paint the picture that ICANN is kicking Verisign's ass. What stupid son-of-a-bitch would believe that?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: It's A Sham ... Yep you could well be right!
    by Richard_Henderson on Tuesday September 03 2002, @12:51PM (#8982)
    User #3269 Info | http://www.atlarge.org/


    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?


    In short....


    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.


    Richard

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: False contact info is not a non-issue
    by Anonymous on Tuesday September 03 2002, @04:13PM (#8997)
    ICANN is finally taking a stand on a big issue. Give them credit where credit is due. Regardless of their motivation, its about time. Bravo to ICANN!
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: It's A Sham ...
    by Anonymous on Monday September 09 2002, @07:22AM (#9128)
    What's next...Arafat condemning terrorism?
    [ 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