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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    Vint Cerf has a different model | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 10 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.
    He Who Has the Gold Rules
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Thursday March 30 2006, @11:11AM (#16666)
    User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
    The trouble with ICANN, right from the start, was that so many people bought into the "stakeholder" model which says people spending a lot of money should get more consideration for their views (because they are bigger 'stakeholders', or have a bigger 'stake').

    Why more people were not angry at this crony corporatism from the start is one of the many mysteries of this whole saga.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:He Who Has the Gold Rules
      by Anonymous on Friday March 31 2006, @10:18AM (#16671)
      "Why more people were not angry at this crony corporatism from the start is one of the many mysteries of this whole saga."

      1. The people were censored or dismissed as wackos.

      2. Anyone with any level of real "anger" would be better directing their energy to a completely new Internet, as they are doing.

      3. Most of the North American users could not care less, their telcos have continued to push the ISOC insiders out of the picture. ICANN is no longer a factor and therefore there is little to "watch" or get concerned about. You can write Cerf's scripts years in advance.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Time to re-incorporate?
    by KarlAuerbach on Thursday March 30 2006, @01:51PM (#16667)
    User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
    Perhaps Vint has not realized the import of his statement:

    If ICANN is, in fact, some sort of industrial "multi-stakeholder" body then it is no longer appropriate for ICANN to remain incorporated as either a California "public benefit" corporation or receive a US Federal exemption under the terms of 501(c)(3).
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:Time to re-incorporate?
      by Anonymous on Friday March 31 2006, @09:04AM (#16668)
      Details, details, Karl

      Cerf does not care about any laws.

      Neither did his boss at Worldcom, Bernie Ebbers, who is now in a U.S. Federal prison for life.

      Cerf and Dyson may reside outside of the prison but they are doomed to live in their glass house and the interior is not a pretty sight.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Vinton Cerf Shocked at the Registrar Scams
    by Anonymous on Sunday April 23 2006, @11:13AM (#16715)
    Vinton Cerf Shocked at the Registrar Scams

    Vinton Cerf and Paul Twinkie recently waded into
    the un-washed masses of Registrars, Resellers,
    domain brokers, tasters, phishers, scammers,
    collectors, lawyers, sharks, and sleeze-balls at
    a recent trade show.

    Vinton Cerf was clearly a fish out of water and
    in shock. Cerf, is accustomed to BIG scams such as the
    Worldcom scam where he and Bernie Ebbers picked
    the U.S. Government's pocket for over $11 Billion
    dollars. Cerf is clearly not cut out for the
    sleezy day-to-day nickel and dime domain name scams which run
    consumers in circles while Registrars laugh all
    the way to the bank.

    The Registrars of course hold up their "ICANN
    Badge" and claim everything they
    do is "legal". Pay no attention to ethics. ICANN
    has never sanctioned a Registrar or Registy.
    ICANN and Vinton Cerf just turn and look the
    other way, and run back to their ivory towers.

    The only solution is of course to provide new
    technology that allows companues and consumers
    to securely register and renew their domain names
    in the global name space without having their
    pockets picked by all of ICANN's representatives
    who claim to provide stability and security.
    The ICANN stability and security model is built
    on the closed circle of Registrars that really
    think they own the names and the Verisign central
    hub that tolerates the scams. Consumers are on
    the outside looking in and get the run-around
    from the Registrars, for a fee.

    Compare that to a true Internet-model system
    where the consumers own the domain names and the
    equipment that proves they own the names. There
    is no need for Verisign, or Registrars. It is a
    much more stable and secure solution. The Network
    **IS** the Registry.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Pay no attention to Paul Twomey's Immigration Scam
      by Anonymous on Sunday April 23 2006, @11:21AM (#16716)
      Pay no attention to Paul Twomey's Immigration Scam

      Mexicans should do what Twomey does:

      1. Set up an off-shore tax haven.
      2. Come and go in the U.S. and extract millions of dollars from a non-profit sham.
      3. Pay no attention to any immigration issues.
      4. Sit on the beach in Mexico with a lap-top and cell-phone counting quarters flowing into domain name vending machines.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:Vinton Cerf Shocked at the Registrar Scams
      by Anonymous on Sunday April 23 2006, @11:24AM (#16717)
      We've heard the stories before... you go to check the
      availability of a really unusual domain name that no
      one else on planet Earth would ever think of, and then
      discover a day later that some company in a remote
      part of the planet has just registered it.

      Myth? Probably not any longer. The following thread
      discusses the issue and implicates registrars and
      their partners in the domain monetization industry:

      http://forums.dnsstuff.com/tool/post/dnsstuff/vpos t?id=943423&trail=15

      Further related information can be found at

      It seems that everyone knows (except ICANN) that we
      are in the midst of a vile plague that has been
      spawned by these domain monetizers. Even Microsoft
      Research has produced a tool to deal with "Discovery
      and Analysis of Large-Scale, Systematic
      Typo-Squatters" (yet another manifestation of the
      domain monetization industry) -- see

      The GNSO seems to be totally clueless (except for the
      registrars/registries who know about these problems
      but only care about maximizing their profits).

      So how do we wake up the GNSO and ICANN and have them
      start investigating these issues?
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:Vinton Cerf Shocked at the Registrar Scams
        by Anonymous on Monday May 15 2006, @08:16PM (#16773)

        This Group is dedicated to all those who have been attacked by domibot.com in registering their domain names. I want to form International Syndicate.


        1. Trace domibot server and deavtivate it.

        2. File case anginst it through international court.

        3. Find people behind Domibot.

        4. Try to convince them

        5. Just help me to find their office. Rest of work I will do myself.
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:Vinton Cerf Shocked at the Registrar Scams
      by Anonymous on Sunday April 23 2006, @11:37AM (#16718)
      Other solutions are to establish a new layer of Professional Registrars in the "Legal Community".
      [They then channel all clerical tasks directly to
      VeriSign in the new back-door bulk channel.]

      "Looking to provide brand owners with a superior alternative to the retail domain name registrar market, Ladas & Parry LLP, a law firm with over 90 years of experience protecting its clients' intellectual property in the United States and abroad, has established Ladas Domains: a private registrar to serve the clients of Ladas & Parry and other corporate brand owners. Ladas Domains provides the service and expertise associated with an intellectual property law firm at the cost of a domain registrar."
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:Vinton Cerf Shocked at the Registrar Scams
      by Anonymous on Sunday April 23 2006, @12:11PM (#16719)
      “Add/drop” abuse is everybody’s problem.
      We Americans have a big problem – actually it’s everybody’s problem — and it has something in common with the .EU Landrush abuse I just finished writing about – no one wants to talk about it. The problem I’m talking about is abuse of the ADD Grace Period (AGP) by a number of key registrars right here in the good ole U.S.A.

      The AGP is a five day window during which a newly registered domain name can be deleted or dropped and the registration fee is then refunded by the Registry. The original intent of the AGP was to provide a mechanism for Registrars and registrants to correct mistakes, reverse fraudulent registrations, etc. That original intent has gone astray - because today the AGP is being misused in a large way. I call it the add/drop scheme.

      The add/drop scheme hurts all Internet users.
      Millions of good .COM domain names – on any given day over 3.5 million and climbing — are unfairly made unavailable to small businesses and others who would actually register and use them in ways for which the names were intended. Many times businesses accidentally let their domain names expire. When they go to renew them, they find they have been snapped up – and taken away with a huge expensive hassle to follow – by an add/drop registrar.

      It’s important to first understand the awesome size of the problem.
      On the 31st day of March 2006, approximately 764,672 .COM names were registered. Of these names, after the five day AGP period expired, only 61,169 .COM names were actually retained.

      So, of the 764,672 names registered on March 31st, 703,503 — or 92% — were dropped just before the grace period expired. The lion’s share – perhaps 99% — were dropped by registrars participating in the add/drop scheme.

      During the week of March 27 — April 2, 2006, 5,822,881 .COM names were registered. Of those names, only 455,918 .COM names were actually retained after the grace period expired.

      Of the .COM names registered during the above week 5,366,963 – or 92.1% — were dropped during the grace period. Once again, at least 99% of these were dropped by registrars participating in the add/drop scheme.

      The scheme is skyrocketing in scope.
      Right now, I estimate there are more than 3,500,000 .COM names tied up in the add/drop scheme on any one day. To put this in perspective, consider that on April 2, there were a total of 48,868,756 .COM names registered worldwide.

      From March 2005 to March 2006 the scheme increased FIFTEEN FOLD!
      During the month of March 2005 a total of 3,243,967 .COM names were registered. Of these, 1,851,778 were dropped during the grace period – most were part of the add/drop scheme.

      The scheme exploded in just a single year.
      Things changed drastically in just one year. During March 2006, a whopping 29,894,290 .COM names were registered. Of these, 92.5% or 27,660,668 were dropped just a moment before the grace period expired – again more than 99% were part of the add/drop scheme.

      So in one year the scheme increased fifteen fold! In fact, it is so lucrative that more companies are joining the scheme each and every day! And we are also now seeing this activity with .NET and .ORG as well.

      Unless the add/drop scheme is checked the problem will assume gigantic proportions.
      By now, I hope I have your attention that this indeed is a significant problem — and that the scope is starting to assume gigantic proportions. First, it’s important to understand why the add/drop scheme even exists.
      [ 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