Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: richard_henderson
Date/Time: Sun, March 3, 2002 at 6:06 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.0 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: Vint Cerf and Stuart Lynn : public message and request for dialogue

Message:
 

 
Copy of e-mail to Vint Cerf and Stuart Lynn. If they fail to respond I will post that information here as an indication of their evasion of requests for openness and explanation. If they respond - as they should to fair and reasonable questions - then I will post their answers here too. Openness is only a threat to people who don't want to be open. These questions are also being forwarded to Fred Upton and targetted members of his committee. And I continue to hold www.VintCerf.com and www.FredUpton.com in reserve, to publicise their standards, their openness, and their accountability - in due course. This is not a hostile action. It is a generous appeal for openness and the proper administration of the DNS, which is a resource for the whole world.

Dear Vint

I am concerned about the need for ICANN to operate in an open, accountable and transparent manner - in the responsibility they exercise as guardians and administrators of the DNS on behalf of the worldwide community.

I am sure you should agree that it is unacceptable for ICANN to evade serious questions when these are politely framed, and unacceptable for ICANN to appear to be evading matters of concern.

I invite your comments on the issues listed below, and particularly ask you (or your designated representative) to state ICANN's policy with regard to these issues.

In the interests of open dialogue I am forwarding this e-mail to Fred Upton, and to friends of mine in the British government and opposition. I am also copying this e-mail to Stuart Lynn. This is, I must stress, a non-aggressive action : I am merely inviting you to participate in dialogue and clarify important issues of policy. This request (and your anticipated clarification) will be posted to the internet public through your own ICANN public forums.

PLEASE rise to this challenge to maintain high standards and openness in ICANN's responsibilities to the Internet community and the world. Evasion of serious and relevant concerns will reflect very badly not only on ICANN, but on the reputation of American government for openness generally, and on the reputation of Fred Upton in particular in the responsibilty he holds for the open and accountable administration of the DNS through ICANN.

PLEASE be decent and kind enough to respond to these areas of concern, and state ICANN's policies with regard to the issues listed, which are being raised by an increasingly dismayed cross-section of the Internet community.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

1.   What is ICANN's policy with regard to the accreditation of Registrars shown to have acted fraudulently (to the detriment of consumers and internet users)?

2.   Why does ICANN continue to endorse, accredit and advertise Registrars who have been shown by WIPO to have submitted fake details in the .info Sunrise?

3.   What is ICANN's policy with regard to Registrars like Tucows, who allow resellers such as Spy Productions to insert hundreds of fake details in the .info Sunrise, and continue to trade? If Tucows fails to set its own house in order, at what point does ICANN withdraw its accreditation in the interests of the consumer and the appropriate administration of the DNS?

4.   What is ICANN's policy towards the Registry Afilias, after it has been revealed that its executives and board members made money from the abuse of their own Sunrise system? (I refer, for example, to the money made by Hal Lubsen's DomainBank registry for submitting large numbers of Blank Trademark applications for profit, at the expense of the systems operated by Afilias, of which Hal Lubsen is CEO; and to the money made by an Afilias board member for supporting almost 5000 fake applications from a single individual.)

5.   How does ICANN explain its complicity in the creation of a Registry contract with Afilias, which allowed for Trademark details to be accepted at face value, without any checks, and which caused the Sunrise abuse and defrauding of Landrush customers?

6.   Why does ICANN refuse to engage in simple and straightforward, open and transparent dialogue over issues like the ones listed here, and respond to specific and detailed concerns?

7.   Has ICANN received any expressions of concern from Fred Upton's committee, over these issues - and if so, what documentation exists of the responses or interchanges that have taken place?

In short, please can you offer reassurance and guarantees that : ICANN has policies in place to deal with fraudulent registrars; that ICANN will implement those policies (and its contracts); and that ICANN is willing to correspond and dialogue on all such matters of concern, when raised by members or groups of the Internet community, in the interests of consumer protection.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Richard Henderson       
     

 


Message Thread: