Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Lost Password
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    Did Jeff Davies find a legal loophole? | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 143 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    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: Truth, lies and registry/registrar responsibil
    by Anonymous on Tuesday December 31 2002, @04:51AM (#10780)

    They have been far from "laissez-faire" in extending their mission beyond its brief and interfering with the fair and equal distribution of the DNS.

    But when it comes to taking responsibility for the Agreements and Policies they've undertaken to construct, or to ensure the proper implementation of those agreements, they have been extremely laissez-faire.

    Their attitude has been : we will create Agreements for Registries to kick them off and get them going, but after that we do not need to call them to account when the Agreements are abused, just as we ourselves do not like being called to account.

    When consumers become the victims of our Agreements, and appeal to us for help, we will ignore them if we wish, or refuse to respond. Our "laissez faire" attitude will give our friends in the Registries and Registrars plenty of leeway to just go ahead and run the game however they see fit.

    It is perfectly possible for ICANN to say, at the outset, "You want to run the Registry for .info, then not only do you have to pay $30000 application fee, you also have to agree that if Rule X, Rule Y and Rule Z are broken, your right to run the registry is forfeited..."

    Furthermore, "You the Registry will impose Rule A, Rule B, and Rule C on your Registrars who want to deal through your Registry... and if those Rules are broken, those Registrars will lose their accreditation, they will lose their right to deal in .info names through the Registry, and if you - the registry - do not enforce those standards, then you the registry will forfeit your right to operate the registry."

    ICANN has power, but does not want to exercise responsibility. It has a duty to consider the implications of its Agreements, and attempt to pre-empt potential harm to consumers, along with potential abuse by operators or registrars.

    ICANN was responsible for the Agreements which resulted in NewTLD chaos, loss to customers, and widespread abuse of process by industry insiders.

    But ICANN just wants to let it all roll along in a "laissez-faire" manner... and devil take the customer.

    That seems to me to be fecklessly irresponsible and an abandonment of principle, worthy of the Worldcom or Enron culture, but wholly unworthy of a not-for-profit entity entrusted with the care of DNS resources for the whole world and millions of ordinary people.

    So, no, I don't think I'm wrong to use and apply Dan Halloran's term "laissez-faire".

    Richard Henderson

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Truth, lies and registry/registrar responsibil by Anonymous
    Re: Truth, lies and registry/registrar responsibil
    by Anonymous on Tuesday December 31 2002, @07:06AM (#10781)
    "ICANN was responsible for the Agreements which resulted in NewTLD chaos"

    I do not think trademark interests found the new roll-out's as chaotic...

    "loss to customers"

    no...the decision by non-trademark consumers to participate with pre-registration scams was their own. ICANN even issued a warning to all consumers not to do so. Common sense would dictate not to invest time and money until publication of the sunrise list was made. The fact people chose to take a more aggressive approach was an individual decision...though I will admit I did not notice any registrars promoting ICANN's warning per se other than clearly stating "no guarantee of registration" - and this turned out to be a decent prophecy for the generic words.

    "and widespread abuse of process by industry insiders."

    the problem is that consumers can't tell a registry where to go (due to service deemed not satisfactory for whatever reason or business practices not deemed as satisfactory) by way of participating with its competitor. This missing piece is what allows "widespread abuse"....under true laissez-faire, this would not be true to the extent it is now...consumers have little voice with their wallets - other than just not to particpate at all....and, to me, best defines "stop energy". There is no energy level with new TLD's right now except negative energy. Compare this to July - Nov 2000...thank you ICANN, nice job....AERO, COOP, MUSEUM, third level models, even INFO and BIZ. You can't destroy momentum much better than we have seen orchestrated and, if nothing else, should be appreciated as much.

    [ 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