Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ
||Sat, September 29, 2001 at 9:10 AM GMT
||Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.0 using Windows 98
||Where ICANN and Afilias are culpable?
I agree with Bob. The registrars and registry both had an obligation (I believe)
to check and disqualify/reject/delete Sunrise applications with clearly invalid dates,
clearly invalid numbers or lack of numbers etc.|
Where I think the challenge process
comes into action is for applications where the Sunrise applicant has at least been
smart enough to fake "possible" details in all the sections. Afilias could not be
expected to sort all those out, and that's where the challenge process swings into
However, I also take the view that given the scale of the fraud, and the
scale of some people's applications (not least, certain registrars), the registry
and registrars had an obligation to intervene. Take Plankenstein: for Speednames
(Afilias part-owner and represented on Board) to charge $500,000 to help Plankenstein
get all those names registered : well I regard that as just plain bad practice, and
in breach of the rules for registrars which I believe stated they had to check the
names they submitted.
Equally, where registrars applied for many names themselves,
or clearly forged TM numbers, both Afilias and ICANN had a responsibility to take
sanctions against those regsitrars in the interests of the Internet Community (who
do not deserve to sustain loss or disadvantage through fraudulent practice by registrars).
At the very least, those registrars should have been stopped from playing any further
part in the .info roll-out.
I regard ICANN and Afilias as culpable in that.
are just a few observations, Antipodes.