| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
A Breath of Fresh Air
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 13 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
One of the closest comparisons to ICANN is
the International Olympic Committee. Any
reasonable person would realize that the major
locations in the world that can host either a
Summer or Winter games, do not really need
some aging group of politicos to be ushered
around the world making their pompous decisions
about where the games will be held. Why do
people tolerate these central bodies ? For one
reason, they are cheap, and they allow people
a legal out. The IOC told us this or that. Of
course, the IOC plays the game in reverse.
The hosting cities are always at fault for
anything that goes wrong. Study the IOC and
you have studied ICANN, complete with the
corruption.
As for a focus on technical or athletes ?
You don't see the IOC out on the track or
skiing down the hill. They are basking in the
sun in some out of the way place, managing
their financial portfolios.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
ICANN and technology are apparently mutually exclusive concepts.
Look at how ICANN has bungled even something as simple as a backup data format (they call it an "escrow" to make it sound more impressive than it is) . Because of this lack, domain name customers continue to be vulnerable to losses that could be caused by the failure of any of the rather shady collection of concerns known as "domain name registrars".
And look at how little came out of ICANN's highly-hyped "security" summit. For all the expense, for all the big-names, for all the smoke and handwaiving ICANN has failed to produce even one concrete improvement in DNS security procedures. ICANN even ignored a set of specific proposals from one of its own directors.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
ICANN and technology are apparently mutually exclusive concepts.
They selected companies that had little to no experience in the DNS to create new registries, failed to follow even the most basic of their technical plans, and either fell flat on their face or took over a year longer than proposed to go live.
All while ignoring applicants who are heavy hitters in the technology or have actually been operational for 5 years.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
|
The full link to that article is here.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Quote: ICANN's CEO in which he contrasted "problem"-prone unsponsored TLDs with the allegedly tidier, and certainly more intensively regulated, sponsored TLDs. "More people I talk to think it's the more likely direction," sprach Lynn, practically begging the Reuters journalist to question whom Lynn's talking to and how he's talking to them. The article equivocated, "Lynn and Cerf both emphasized that their opinions were their own and not that of ICANN, but said others agreed with them."
I have been in contact, for quite some time, with US and UK authorities (and lawyers) about these domain and trademark problems.
I would bring your attention to Lynn's statement, which Vint Cerf agreed with, about regulated TLDs - "More people I talk to think it's the more likely direction,"
This is very interesting - because the United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department of Commerce ALREADY knew this.
I wonder why they did not tell ICANN?
UN WIPO and US DOC always knew that a restricted TLD was required for trademarks.
They knew the answer to exclusively identify ALL trademark domains.
Information for lawyers - yes I know all about classifications and all the other 'so-called' problems.
Please visit WIPO.org.uk to see rationale behind the solution (which was self-evident).
Incidentally, you would think the news media would report on WIPO.org.uk - as the United Nations WIPO.org take away similar domains to trademarks - wouldn't you?
Also they would report the fact that the solution was ratified by honest attorneys - including the honourable G. Gervaise Davis III, a UN WIPO panellist judge himself.
I have contacted over 100 news editors and journalists of newspapers and TV. Perhaps they are all ignorant imbeciles and could not recognize a story if it bit their bottom ;-)
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
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
|
