Re: [ga] ICANN Board can intervene to stop domain tasting for 1 year

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Roberto and all,

  First, all, please trim your CC's and TO's before sending a response
on this thread.

  Roberto, again, respectively, you still miss the point I believe.  The point
is that why should registrants pay any fee what so ever?  What's the
justification when it isn't and never has been a registrant generated problem
in the first place?  Registries should never have the authority or even
ability to put any Domain name on hold that has been reserved or
queried, or even that has recently expired taking into account the
grace period of course.  Any registrant, or would be registrant, should
have the ability to choose their own registrar of choice without restriction.
These I believe are the most relevant points.  Sure there is a cost for
front running/tasting.  But those costs were created by ICANN's poor
RIR's not registrants or would be registrants.  Registrars also should not
bare the costs of an ICANN past Bod error in judgment.  ICANN should
bare those costs from it's own funds or make mandatory a solution, both
short term, and long term.  Hence requiring such solutions being solicited
via public comment, and/or by the GNSO council via the relevant constituencies
such as they are....

  From where I sit, ICANN created/allowed for Tasting/Front Running,
ICANN should pay for the damage which has resulted.

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
My Phone: 214-244-4827

Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> George Kirikos wrote:
>
> >
> > The point was that at:
> >
> > http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg00858.html
> >
> > you wrote that "I fully agree. $0.20 re-registration fee is
> > an insufficient solution."
>
> Sorry, there might be a misunderstanding.
> The sentences you quote are Dominik's.
>
> What I did agree, was the last sentence in Dominik's post, which reads "If I
> cannot order a pizza and then cancel the order just paying $0.20 fine, why
> should have I an extra privilege regarding domain names?".
> Personally, I don't want to get into the debate on whether a specific amount
> is sufficient or not, my point is only that I don't see any probem in
> *having* a non-refundable fee of some sort, much the same way it happens in
> real life for many other similar cancellation of transactions.
>
> Regards,
> Roberto
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                   Name: winmail.dat
>    winmail.dat    Type: application/ms-tnef
>               Encoding: base64