>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Non-member submission from ["Russ Smith" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 13:55:33 -0400 (EDT) > >>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jul 30 13:55:32 2000 >Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Received: from 5015.consumer.net (unknown [209.237.131.115]) > by ns1.vrx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5565F169 > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 13:55:07 -0400 (EDT) >Received: from CJ52269A ([24.10.226.181]) by 5015.consumer.net > (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-52914U100L100S0V35) > with SMTP id net; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 13:51:41 -0400 >From: "Russ Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "vinton g. cerf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: Complaint to Dept of Commerce on abuse of users by ICANN >Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 13:54:19 -0400 >Message-ID: <000901bffa4f$2f7f8570$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 >Importance: Normal >In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>have you taken time to look into the numbers of people trying to >>register? do you know what the planning estimates were before >>registration campaigns were initiated by various organizations? >>The planning numbers for registration were on the order of 10,000 >>people. As of a few days ago something like 145,000 people had > > >This excuse follows the same "excuse pattern" that ICANN provides for almost >every problem. What keeps happening is that these groups that do the >"planning" do so in secret and routinely ignore comments and often do not >know what they are doing. Then when all kinds of problems occur due to the >faulty planning there are all these claims that some schedule must be met >and that anyone who wants to correct the problems is trying to slow down the >process and should be ignored. > >The same thing happened with the UDRP. When that was written many people >complained about no appeals process (short of filing a lawsuit). There are >also extremely short deadlines for responding to a complaint or filing the >"appeal" lawsuit (10 days). The excuse that was given was that these >appeals were only a delaying tactic by "cybersquatters". Here we are 8 >months into the UDRP process and all kinds of problems have been identified >with some of decisions rendered. The lack of an appeals process has >resulted in at least 5 federal lawsuits and there have been numerous >complaints about the short deadlines. Now that people are asking ICANN to >fix it we get brushed off. McLaughlin recommended lawyers publish the UDRP >problems in legal journals so ICANN can review these some time in the >future. Meanwhile, known problem that could be corrected are allowed to >continue. > >There have been 2 reconsideration requests filed concerning the issue of >ICANN posting the appeals lawsuits in the list of decisions. ICANN's >response to the request >included:http://www.icann.org/reconsideration/rc00-5.htm > >"The ICANN tables do not include notations relating to subsequent >litigation, because the ICANN staff is simply too small and too >overstretched to monitor and verify the hundreds of legal disputes that will >surely ensue." > >This response is misleading as the only thing that needs to be monitored and >published is whether a domain owner files a lawsuit within 10 days and has >the domain transfer stopped. I filed a reconsideration request on this >matter (based on ICANN's misleading response) and that reconsideration >request has been ignored. > >Russ Smith >http://consumer.net > > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ph-1.613.473.1719 "The truth is always hard. The only truly punishable offense in Washington is to tell the truth. You will get along in Washington better by lying one way or the other. If you tell the truth you are unlikely to be forgiven." - Prof. Angelo Codevilla, The Washington Weekly, July 17 2000
