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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we're in) | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 151 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: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @07:17PM (#1252)

    Does IOD have $34,000,000 ?

    http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/biz/registry-agmt-appw-25apr01.htm
    4. Funding Commitment

    Registry Operator shall have available from either internal or external sources a minimum of US $34,000,000 in funding solely for Registry Operator's activities in establishing and operating the Registry TLD through the date that is one year following the Commencement-of-Service Date.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @08:01PM (#1255)
    Doesn't sound like a situation that is anywhere near being within the spirit of opening competition now does it?

    Such an outrageous barrier to entry is anti-competitive and only serves to prove that ICANN violates the "public trust" as Mr Lynn likes to call it.

    You can add to this little deceptive maneuver the fact that it was slipped in after the fact, like in after everyone ponies up a $50,000 lottery fee,
    which in the case of Afilias was $50,000 split between their 19 members and of those we find most of the largest established players in the currently in the market.

    What a set up, ICANN hands out 7 new tlds only 2 of which would be considered most likely to offer the most revenue, and of course who get's em?

    The big established players.

    That way whatever threat the new tlds might pose is really a mute point because the big players well, have no downside at all, Now do they?

    This is ICANN's warped view of competition and as far as "proof of concept" is concerned and devoid of the nonsense about crashing the net.
    What the hell are they trying to prove?

    Nothing.

    Can anyone show me where to find the document that spells out exactly what concepts need to be proven so we all can follow right along and determine whether things are on the up and up.

    That's right it's all a mystery and the reason it is simple, ICANN gets to make it up as they please, when they please, and then ram it down our throats and call it "consensus"

    For that matter, where can one find the pre-set criteria that determined who was or wasn't a worthy applicant in the new tld process?

    That's right you can't find it.

    If ICANN were an honest and professional organization, then predetermined criteria would have been made available so one would know if they qualified or not, and if ICANN knew without a shadow of a doubt that they would pick so few tlds, (which by the way they halfway got right in explaining beforehand but it was still purposely ambiguous like the whole process in general) then they had no business approaching the issue of an application fee as they did. They certainly didn't discourage applications did they, more like they took every moment to mention the all important $50,000.

    Oh and did I mention that Ken Stubbs, then Chairman of the Names Council of the Domain Name Supporting Organization of ICANN was also on the Board of Afilias.

    Yep, that's right the same Afilias that was granted .Info

    ICANN and the word public trust being used together is an oxymoron.

    Morons! yeah that about sums it up.

    What a disgrace.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Of Course ICANN is a Barrier to Entry
    by Anonymous on Thursday July 12 2001, @09:03PM (#1263)
    Of Course ICANN is a Barrier to Entry

    Is that news to anyone ?

    Did people think ICANN was fair ?

    Did people believe Esther Dyson about being
    for the "little guy" ?
    or did they not understand that to her, the
    "little guy" is Neuborn compared to NSI

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we'
    by Anonymous on Friday July 13 2001, @08:51AM (#1307)
    I think the only people buying New.net names are some of the readers of this site. How about we have good ol' Ben Edelman tell us how many New.net fake names have been purchased?
    [ 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