This is a class action waiting to happen. ------ Original Message ------ Received: 10:16 PM PDT, 09/21/2004 From: George Kirikos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ICANN caught with pants down -- implements Expired Domain Deletions Policy
> Hello, > > As a followup to the prior news regarding the NSI anti-competitive move > to hijack expired domains from their prior owners, ICANN has stepped up > with 2 announcements: > > 1) http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-21sep04-2.htm > > This one attempts to implement an Expired Domain Deletions Policy > (EDDP), with 3 months notice (won't take effect immediately). What have > they been doing for the past *11 MONTHS*, as there has not been a > single thing preventing them from doing this when it was approved in > CARTHAGE, TUNISIA in 2003! > > http://www.icann.org/announcements/advisory-31oct03.htm > > The EDDP contains the interesting language: > > http://www.icann.org/registrars/eddp.htm > > "Extenuating circumstances are defined as: UDRP action, valid court > order, failure of a Registrar's renewal process (***which does not > include failure of a registrant to respond***)," > > I assume the part between *** and *** is there to put a stop to the > abusive practice of NSI taking over their clients' expired domains. > > 2) ICANN issued an *advisory* regarding the NSI/SnapNames actions: > > http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-21sep04-1.htm > > However, they do not comment whether those auctions under the "old > rules" (i.e until December 21, when EDDP is to take effect) have > legitimacy. With the first auctions of NSI expiring on Wednesday, > September 22, 2004 (today!), bidders need to know whether those > auctions are legitimate, and will not be made void at some later date. > > ICANN needs to do more, and quickly. It's not like they've not been on > notice of this by me and others for the past 3 years, sheesh. This was > drama that if ICANN had been doing its job, would have been pre-empted > entirely. Instead, the market is shaken up for the next 3 months, or > until NSI backs down, or is sued, etc. > > I can see NSI upping the stakes by changing their agreement to transfer > the domain to themselves BEFORE expiry, for example, to get around > these changes. The guys at NSI are not going to give up --- they're > constantly thinking up ways to abuse the marketplace, and recreate > their former monopoly. The time has come to make iron-clad rules that > put things back in registrants' favour, permanently. > > Sincerely, > > George Kirikos > http://www.kirikos.com/ >
