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.
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.
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
* * * * *
* * *
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?
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?
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.