Hal Lubsen's company accepted $16380 to submit fake applications from William LorenzHal
Lubsen's company broke the rules by doing so
Hal Lubsen's (other) company registered
these fake applications
Hal Lubsen's companies (both) were asked to delete these
ineligible names to undo the wrong - but didn't
Hal Lubsen's companies were asked
AGAIN at least 12 times
Hal Lubsen's company (Afilias) had the contractual right
to delete names, specifically ineligible names of this nature
Hal Lubsen's company's
honest customers were defrauded by the submission and registration of these ineligible
names
So it might be argued in court that they were "obstructive" in failing to
take action they were capable of taking to prevent fraud; and they might be said
to be "contributory" to the fraud by processing clearly fraudulent applications in
breach of their own rules
The correspondence of WILLIAM LORENZ posted today at
www.HalLubsen.com proves that DomainBank and Afilias were specifically asked to delete
these names but failed to do so (even though there were contractual rights and obligations
to do so)
In a court of law, pre-registrants who lost out because of this specific
action and inaction (and we have complainants), might present a strong argument that
their losses were the result of actions and decisions taken by these two company's.
Furthermore
the precedent then paves the way for every other defrauded pre-registrant
Costs
should include not only lost application fees but the cumulative expectation value
of over 10000 names
Steps should then be taken to insist on the removal of those
executives who presided over the roll-out, including the executives at ICANN who
had powers to intervene
Rachel Macgregor
***the term "Hal Lubsen's company"
refers to companies in which Hal Lubsen has either a share of ownership, or executive
roles***