Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ
||Fri, January 11, 2002 at 11:23 AM GMT
||Netscape Communicator V4.74 using Windows 98
||I note Stuart Lynn's coment - Cybersquatting disputes are less likely in a tightly regulated domain"
Why then did Stuart Lynn and Vint Cerf approve an "after the event" IP protection
policy for the .info Sunrise that produced 10,000 instances of TM fraud and cybersquatting?|
they only gain this wisdom "after the event"?
Shame about the expectations of the
Landrushers who paid and lost millions to Afilias's registrars and affiliates for
NO CHANCE at these names in the .info Landrush. Strike One.
Never mind, it's an
ill wind that blows no one any good - the registry Afilias Ltd. and their registrars
and affiliates managed to pocket 10,000 X 5 year registration fees from the Sunrise
frauds!!! Strike Two.
Had these names been registered in the Landrush they
would have returned the Afilias gang 10,000 X 2 year registration fee. When
registered in Sunrise they returned the Afilias gang two and a half times as much.
don't forget that these 10,000 names will again be offered to the general public.
Landrushers - looks to me that you are victims of one of the great
scams on the Internet, apparently perpetrated by those with responsibility for the
administration of the DNS.
The likes of Stuart and Vint are lucky that in regard
to the Afilias .info fiasco, it appears that only they will stand in official judgement
of their conduct. Were there appropriate representation of the interests of
the general public on the ICANN BoD, then the official assessment of Stuart and Vint's
performance might be different and the pair would be looking for alternative employment.
But had the broad Internet community been appropriately represented on the BoD, it's
not likely we would have experienced the abomination of the .info Sunrise and lost
our money and the chance of valuable Landrush names.