In my pre .info launch search for exclusive cueue registrars, I paid money to Regland
for .info Landrush preregistrations.It was only when posters at this forum began
analysing the relative effectiveness of the different registrars during the .info
launch did I find out that RegLand had closed its doors prior to the launch.
Now,
while only a handful of the dozen or more of the registrars I used for the .info
Landrush managed to register names for me - making RegLand's non-participation in
the .info name distribution just as effective in securing names for me as those registrars
to whom I paid money which produced no registrations - I am angry that an insolvent
or just plain scam company is permitted to participate in a new extension launch.
In
my country there are enourous, daily, financial penalties for trading while insolvent,
and the regulatory authorities immediately step in to protect the interests of stake
holders when a company advises of its inability to continue trading. The public then
have access to information on retrieval of their stake holdings.
I think it is
important to note that when news of RegLand's failure and the loss of preregistrant's
money hit this forum, it made not a ripple, as though the forum just accepted the
loss as part of the domain registry and reseller business.
It seems to me that
the Internet community has grown accustomed to being ripped-off when dealing with
registries and resellers, and that a culture has been developed in which the insiders
can pretty much do what they like, while the general public participate at their
own risk.
It looks to me that the domain business, along with a few notable ethical
players, has attracted operators whose participation can best be described as opportunistic,
whose business practices are at odds with the interests of the Internet community
and the long term interests of the Internet.
I think all new money making opportunities
will attract less desirable participants whose aims are fast bucks, nothing more,
nothing less, and it is these areas of commerce that require close public scrutiny
and control, in order to protect the interests of the public.
Given the role that
the Internet will play in future commerce and culture in general, across the planet,
the Internet's regulation must serve the short and long term interests of all its
constituencies.
At present, this would not appear to be the case.
ICANN from
what I read, is not satisfied with its original brief, preferring instead to enter
areas of policy beyond its purview, while, as demonstrated by its administration
of the new TLD Registry selection process and the subsequent regulation of the new
registries and their resellers, gives nothing more than lip service to the notion
that it is a Public Benefit Corporation.
The behaviour of the new registries and
many of their resellers during the recent launches brings an image to mind of the
Queensland beaches, where, if there are sharks or stingers in the surf, warning signs
are placed prominently on the affected beach by our life savers/life guards, until
the danger has passed. In the case of sharks, the life savers will chase them
in surf boats until they pose no more danger to surfers.
Unfortunately, at present
in the domain businees, there seems to be no comparable authotity or body to that
which protects Queensland surfers.
It seems that those in the Internet community
with experience of domains are aware that messing with domains can be dangerous,
and seemingly, as demonstrated by the RegLand incident, accepting that there are
shonks and scams that will put their credit cards at peril.
This fact should ring
alarm bells, may be shark alarm bells, for those with responsibility for the operation
of the notional DNS regulatory authority ICANN - the US Congress and Department of
Commerce.
If those currently appointed to authority within ICANN prefer to focus
their energies on matters apparently at odds to the benefits of the broad Internet
community, then let them find other jobs.
Although I believe that the new TLD Registry
selection process could be used as evidence that the current ICANN executive can
not separate public benefit from personal gain, I think that the events of the new
TLD launches is the evidence that should be used by the Congress and the DoC to call
the ICANN executive to explain why they should not be dismissed immediately and replaced
with the calibre of people that such positions of responsibility require.
It seems
to me that the domain waters are dangers because of a culture which has developed
under the current ICANN executive, who gauging by their performance with the new
TLDs - have a look at your credit card accounts if you need reminding - don't care
much for average folk and their rightful expectations to be dealt with fairly, openly
and accountably, but rather, cast a blind eye over the operations and regular excesses
of its accredited registries, registrars and affiliates.
I want an ICANN which
demonstrates that its operations are serving the interests of the broad Internet
community and not the interests of the executive and their business associates.
I
want an ICANN that is pro-active and vigilant, impartial, responsive and communicative.
I
want an ICANN which has the respect and trust of the broad Internet community.
I
want an ICANN which will never permit a repeat the abominations of the .info and
.biz launches.
That's all I want Santa.