<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Opposed to VeriSign's proposed com/net Anti-Abuse Policy, due to lack of due process
- To: "registryservice@xxxxxxxxx" <registryservice@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Opposed to VeriSign's proposed com/net Anti-Abuse Policy, due to lack of due process
- From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 19:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
Hello,
VeriSign has submitted an application to ICANN for an Anti-Abuse policy for
com/net domain names:
http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/#2011008
We oppose that application, as it does not provide any due process to domain
name registrants. VeriSign would become the judge, jury and executioner, able
to suspend or delete domain names that are allegedly "abusive".
VeriSign even recognizes that legitimate domain names will be affected. To
attempt to mitigate these "false positives", VeriSign proposes that
legitimate registrants would only be able to protest *after* VeriSign has
already taken action. Such action would have already damaged the innocent
registrants and their users.
This is counter to the domain name registrants' rights to due process. Instead,
VeriSign should be compelled to prove the alleged abuse in an appropriate legal
forum (e.g. a court), where the registrants can face their accuser, before
being allowed to suspend or delete a domain name.
If ICANN is going to permit this policy to go forward without due process
changes, VeriSign should be required to carry liability insurance in the amount
of $100 million for each act of suspension/deletion. This would allow
registrants to recover financially in the event that VeriSign is found guilty
of suspending/deleting a domain name that was not in fact "abusive."
Sincerely,
George Kirikos
http://www.leap.com/
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|