|
Class Action Alleges ICANN's .biz Is an Illegal Lottery
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 52 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
What goes around, comes around. I hope they all get screwed.....
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
NeuLevel's Site Describes it as a "Lottery"
http://www.neulevel.com/aboutnl/157779.html
"if more than one party wants a name, there will be a lottery to determine
who gets it."
"If the cybersquatter continues with the process and wins the lottery, you'
ll be notified
of his or her contact information."
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
Can the legal experts comment on how the
Civil Actions and Crimimal Charges differ ?
When does the State of California (and other States) step in to file Criminal Charges against the
ICANN Board Members (past and present) who
set up these lotteries ?
Can the U.S. Government's Department of Commerce
grant immunity to the ICANN Board ? to keep them
out of Federal Prisons ?
Why should U.S. taxpayers have to house and
feed the ICANN Board members ?
Is there some country where the ICANN Board
members could all be sent ? Could they start their
own Penal Colony ? Could Alcatraz be turned into
a Country for the ICANN Board to live ?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
The CEO of .INFO wanted .BIZ ?
http://www.icann.org/tlds/biz3/
An unsponsored TLD application has been submitted by:
iDomains, Inc.
23 West 4th St.
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18015 USA
Henry A. Lubsen, Jr.
+1 610 317-9606
hlubsen@idomains.com
-----------
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.icann.org/tlds/biz3/notice.html
Pursuant to the TLD Application Review Procedure posted on ICANN web site, we hereby notify you of the following material change in circumstances with respect to the application of iDomains, Inc. to operate a registry for the .BIZ top-level domain.
As we outlined in our application, we continue to seek global partners to join our efforts. Toward that goal, as of November 6, 2000, La Bandera S.A., a Chilean corporation, has become a stockholder in iDomains, Inc. Accordingly, below is an updated list of the owners of five percent or more of the equity interest in iDomains. Inc.:
5% Shareholders
Henry A. Lubsen, Jr.
Kenyon T. Stubbs
Steve Heflin
M. Scott Hemphill
La Bandera, S.A.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
This is just a replay of the IAHC/CORE fiasco.
It is the same people involved at the Registrar level.
ICANN and Neulevel seem to attract the unsavory
members of society who build scams on top of the
systems, and point to ICANN for endorsement. The
general public assumes ICANN only endorses quality
people and companies. That is clearly not the case.
Now ICANN is judged by the company it keeps.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
Bret Fausett has posted NeuLevel's response, in .pdf. -g
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
Will this be an Out of Court Settlement in the next
few weeks ? so that people can get on with the
development of the .BIZ TLD
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
An abusive, explotive domain lottery. . .
Hey, Lynn! Is this the "proof of concept" test that ICANN is always talking about?
It has to be, because everything else is simple.
LOL.... "proof of concept." There is nothing to prove: the Internet root can handle more TLDs and so can the market--but the market is none of your business. The market will experience its own winds, currents and evolution.
You guys and ladies over at ICANN embarrass yourselves on a daily basis. Don't be so constipated. The equation is simple: approve the competent applicants who have not soiled themselves with corruption, and who (unlike NeuLevel and Afilias) will not further embarrass ICANN and poorly reflect upon it.
Be fair, even-handed and approve a plan that has the industry in its best interest.
Make a decision that catalyzes TRUE competition--not this Afilias and NeuLevel crap wherein the current players regroup to create a new entity (in name only). Afilias. . . what a joke.
Hey, Lynn! Do you think ICANN has the nobility to do the right thing?
Oh, and stop talking about "robust discussion," "open and transparent," "bottom-up," etc. It is disingenuous--you know it and we know it.
This is your legacy, Lynn. Until you change it.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
- Re: Hey Lynn!
by Anonymous
Friday July 27 2001, @07:43AM
- Reply
by Anonymous
Friday July 27 2001, @10:51AM
|
|
|
Tell me if I'm wrong the only this would do is prevent them from selling or marketing in California and any state this would be illegal.
Who cares anyway, .biz will follow the .net path to nowhere.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
How Can NeuLevel Move Away from All This ?
How can NeuLevel just start selling names
at $5 per year ?
Can the Court note that NeuLevel is not involved ?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
If the ICANN Board members end up in prison,
will they still have Internet access ?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Re: [ga] Broken link
To: ga@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [ga] Broken link
From: Kent Crispin
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:10:18 -0700
In-Reply-To: ; from DannyYounger@cs.com on Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 12:18:16PM -0400
Mail-Followup-To: ga@dnso.org
References:
Sender: owner-ga-full@dnso.org
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 12:18:16PM -0400, DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
> Dear Roeland,
>
> Re: http://www.nic.biz/aboutnl/07262001.html
>
> You wrote: "This link doesn't resolve."
>
> Having anticipated this comment, I published the entirety of Jeff Neuman's
> brief statement.
But of course, it does resolve, for those who chose to configure their
resolvers in the standard manner. And, of course, there is nothing we
can do for those who chose to not configure their resolvers in the
standard manner.
--
Kent Crispin "Be good, and you will be
kent@songbird.com lonesome." -- Mark Twain
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
[council] Afilias ".info" registry "Sunrise" now open
To: names council
Subject: [council] Afilias ".info" registry "Sunrise" now open
From: Ken Stubbs
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 12:33:44 -0400
Sender: owner-council@dnso.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fellow council members...
I thought you might be interested to know that ...
Today the Afilias registry (www.afilias.info) formally opened for
submissions through authorized afilias registrars for the initial
".info" sunrise queue .
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Re[2]: [ga] NeuLevel Statement
To: Roeland Meyer
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] NeuLevel Statement
From: "William X. Walsh"
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 13:11:35 -0700
CC: "'DannyYounger@cs.com'" , ga@dnso.org
In-Reply-To:
References:
Reply-To: "William X. Walsh"
Sender: owner-ga-full@dnso.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Roeland,
Only for those who broke their dns by using an alt.root.
Saturday, July 28, 2001, 9:00:17 AM, Roeland Meyer wrote:
>> From: DannyYounger@cs.com [mailto:DannyYounger@cs.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 8:34 AM
>>
>> Statement from Jeffrey J. Neuman
>> Director, Policy and Intellectual Property
>> NeuLevel, Inc.
>> July 26, 2001
>>
>> It has come to our attention that a lawsuit has been filed in
>> the State of
>> California regarding the launch process for .BIZ domain
>> names. We believe
>> http://www.nic.biz/aboutnl/07262001.html
> This link doesn't resolve.
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
Didn't Magaziner and Tooney anticipate this ?
when they engineered the .BIZ takeover.
By having Australia as part of the .BIZ "deal",
didn't Tooney make it possible to run the lottery
there, without concern for U.S. laws ?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
"According to a posting by Mike Palage to the Registrars Constituency"
Is this the Michael Palage who is part of .INFO ?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
I would strongly *urge* each of you to contact your own State Attorney General and file a complaint about these companies running and selling Lottery *tickets* in your *State*.
This is a state by state level lawsuit.
Get your money back! Its your money!
50 lawsuits will get action!
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
July 30, 2001
Suit Filed in Registration of Domain Names
By SUSAN STELLIN
nternet users upset about the process for registering addresses with the new dot-biz extension have complained that the system is being run like a lottery, and a new lawsuit says that is exactly what it is.
The lawsuit, filed last Monday in Los Angeles Superior Court, says that because the company in charge of the dot-biz domain, NeuLevel Inc., charges a $2 fee merely to submit an application for an address, with plans to select one application at random if there are multiple requests for the same address, the system qualifies as an illegal lottery in California and the 49 other states.
"It's an illegal lottery," said Derek Newman, a lawyer with Newman & Newman in Seattle, one of three law firms handling the case, "because people are paying money but they're not getting anything in return."
If there are multiple applications for one address, those who file unsuccessful applications will not get a refund on their application fee. Companies that register Internet addresses on behalf of the public, known as registrars, are passing along NeuLevel's $2 fee to customers, plus fees of their own for the service of submitting an application.
Besides NeuLevel, based in Sterling, Va., the suit, which is seeking class-action status, names as defendants the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the organization responsible for the Internet's address system; and more than 60 companies accredited by Icann to register dot-biz domain names.
Jeff Neuman, NeuLevel's director of policy and intellectual property, declined to comment on the case, as did a spokeswoman for Icann, which approved the contract governing the rollout of dot-biz addresses — one of seven new extensions being added to the Internet's address system.
But on Thursday, NeuLevel issued a statement saying: "We believe that the dot-biz domain name selection process is the most fair and equitable way to distribute domain names. We believe the lawsuit is without merit and has been filed in an attempt to derail the successful introduction of dot-biz."
The plaintiffs named in the suit are David Scott Smiley, a radio D.J. from Scottsdale, Ariz., who Mr. Newman said had tried to register radio.biz and dj.biz; and Skyscraper Productions, which offers traffic safety courses online and which hopes to register trafficschool.biz.
But they are not the only ones to question the process.
"Somebody had raised the issue a while back on a mailing list," said Larry Erlich, president of the Internet registrar DomainRegistry.com. "And at that point I thought, `That's a good point; I'll look into it.' "
Mr. Erlich said he was unable to get satisfactory assurance from NeuLevel or Icann that the system was not a lottery, so he decided not to accept applications for dot-biz addresses, although his company was still named as a defendant in the suit.
"They should not have included us," he said. "We've stated very clearly on our Web site that we're not taking applications. And luckily we didn't at this point."
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
|
As of today, the Attorney General of Texas, has agreed to file a lawsuit against the parties to recover damages due to the state of Texas and its citizens. Under the anti-lottery statues of Texas.
I see more states to follow this coure of action.
Be sure to file a complaint in your state with your Attormey General.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
