Yes, NetSol's domain policy list went away shortly after Johnson (or someone, it wasn't in his name) posted information about the lawsuit. Others also posted some information they were able to find elsewhere. From my NelStol domain policy email archive, here are some of the allegations with particular relevance to ICANN:|
Plaintiff has personal knowledge of instances of violations of the ICANN Agreement, predatory practices against competitors, disregarding the law when compliance therewith should stop wrongful conduct, ignoring conflicts of interest which produce a competitive advantage for Verisign, and its willingness to proffer untruthfulness instead of the complete truth when the opportunity arises.
51. As the ICANN Representative for Verisign, Plaintiff and Network's General Counsel, often were in conflict with senior management on the Registrar side of Network in urging them not to place the Registrar Accreditation Agreement with ICANN in jeopardy of termination should Verisign's conduct be found to be guilty of violations of criminal misconduct, fraudulent or dishonest behavior, or for acts in which its intentional unfair dealings directed against its customers, employees and competitors are discovered and proven.
55. Among instances where Network disregarded the proper procedures to clear a domain dispute for its advantage and providing different and favorable treatment than that afforded similarly situated customers in violation of Network's rules, a powerful Democratic United States Congressman, Ed Markey sitting on the House Commerce Committee with jurisdiction over both Verisign and Network services, was given special treatment to retrieve his lost domain name that had subsequently been lawfully acquired by Network's paying customer who is a speculator. Congressman Markey, was identified by Verisign's
Roger Cochetti, Senior Vice President, Policy, as being "the kind of guy who has a long memory and quite capable of retaliating against those who don't treat him respectfully and he's capable of doing anything to Verisign or us". Defendants used a pretext of a " no contact" notice to seize the domain name even though Verisign was paid current by its customer and knew this was the improper procedure.
56. Other examples where Defendant's Verisign and Network officers instructed its employees to act in ways contrary to the law and spirit of the ICANN agreement, in much the same as issues in the instant litigation, involves not fully responding to the request from the National Telecommunications Information Agency when it expressed written concern about security issues on the server, at a time when the officers of Verisign knew from its customer's and internal technical management team of serious incursions from outside sources because of the system's security weakness, and from the active misconduct of internal sources engaged in cheating customers by reselling domain names for a personal profit. The internal employees were fired.
57. Verisign employees targeted companies, including one Defendant Wolford called "a copy-cat ratbag registrar" in referring to a major competitor, where lack of timely transfer or refusal to transfer domain names is ordered, or issues relating to the reasonable assurance of payment, pre-registration of multilingual domain names, the pre-payment requirements of the ICANN agreements through Verisign's Partner Program, and the hoarding of domain names are parsed at the risk of liability to the ICANN Agreement and is herein offered to showcase the culture of Defendants and its predisposition for not respecting the line not to cross. Plaintiff was hired by Jim Rutt, CEO, and was told to keep us honest. Plaintiff viewed this as protected activity too.
One wonders if there will be future lawsuits against Veri$ign by registrars, registrants, and/or others who might like to use Johnson as a witness. He's certainly looking more credible than Veri$ign. -g