The trouble was that the very people (eg Afilias directors) you would expect to be protecting the process and its integrity (to safeguard honest customers) were themselves damaging the process, or (via their own Registrar companies) engaging in profitable activity regardless of whether the process was being adhered to. This was one of the weaknesses in the system : the fact that most of the Afilias Directors of the .info registry were themselves Registrars who could benefit from the Registry's lax implementation of the process and agreements.
So for example, there was Govinda Leopold - Afilias Director and running 1st Domain net at the same time, applying in the Sunrise for hawaii.info, maui.info, and govinda.info
If you take a look at the TM numbers supplied to support these applications, it's ludicrous:
Hawaii.info: TM 44455555 from country: TN
Maui.info: TM 3333345 from country: BN
Furthermore her Registrar company also sponsored a person who applied through unaccountable Yahoo addresses from countries whose TM details they hoped might be hard to trace: Bangladesh, Yemen, Bulgaria, Bhutan, Malaysia, Libya, Dubai, Brunei, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Namibia - ...
Oh, but it all made money for Govinda's company so screw the integrity of the process, even if Govinda IS also an Afilias director.
These Trademarks were later shown to be non-existent, but at the time when I published their details at the Internet Challenge, I was even threatened by this person's attorney who claimed the Trademarks were genuine... WIPO later showed that did not seem to be the case.
The problem was that the gamekeeper also appeared to be the poacher. When Hal Lubsen's colleagues at DomainBank (or Hal himself?) broke the Afilias rules with Lorenz's 93 domains, you would expect the "gamekeeper" (Afilias) to stop that piece of poaching by saying, no, these applications are ineligible, and we have landrush pre-registrants to protect, so we can't possibly allow these facially ineligible claims, what the fuck are you playing at?
But then, Hal Lubsen was also the CEO of Afilias, and the "gamekeepers" not only went ahead and accepted the rule-breaking applications (zero data in all 4 mandatory TM datd fields) but also refused to cancel the registrations on the registrant's request to protect other customers in Landrush - because that would, of course, have potentially lost DomainBank their money.
So as has been pointed out higher up in this thread of messages, the process and agreements were not only flawed in themselves, but were not properly policed, very probably because of the fundamental conflict of interest with "gamekeepers" and "poachers" having roles both in the Registry and at Registrar level. It was in the interests of the registrars for the Agreement to be very loosely implemented (or just plain ignored) but the Afilias directors who should have maintained the process WERE registrars. Afilias was, from the outset, a Registrars' cartel. The club existed and was set up to make money for the Registrars involved.
The rules were "take it or leave it"... sometimes they just got in the way... the primary goal was making money from customers... if that meant SELLING the same name at Landrush 1, at Sunrise, and at Landrush 2... all so much the better.