[ICANN-EU] Re: Attn. Louis Touton to:Re: Regland

[Joe Baptista <baptista@pccf.net>]

But seriously - Touton's a screamer.  One expects him to be a lady - but a
screamer.  Oy vey.

regards
joe

On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:

> Joe and all,
> 
>   Of course ICANN and Touton claim this legal action is "Frivolous".
> But of course they would make this claim!  ROFLMAO.  We will see
> if a judge here in Texas will agree with his claim.  My guess is that
> such a claim by Louis Touton will not stand.  I hope Louis has
> retained a good trial atty.  And I hope for his sake it isn't Joe Simms!
> 
>   For Louis:   Louis, we here in Texas have had enough of your nonsense.
> Look forward to more of this sort of action in the near future...
> 
> Joe Baptista wrote:
> 
> > Touton really comes off as a hitler type.  According to regland he does
> > alot of screaming during the course of business - i wonder if he bites
> > rugs too?  strange boy.
> >
> >          If you have any questions, Please contact Regland, Inc. at
> >                                 210-495-9800
> >                         CAUSE NO. __________________
> >
> >    REGLAND, INC.                                          §          IN
> >    THE DISTRICT COURT
> >
> >      §
> >                            Plaintiff,                                  §
> >
> >      §
> >    VS.
> >    §
> >
> >      §          OF BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS
> >    INTERNET CORPORATION FOR            §
> >    ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS     §
> >    A/K/A ICANN AND LOUIS TOUTON,      §
> >    INDIVIDUALLY,                                          §
> >
> >      §
> >                            Defendants.
> >    §          ______ JUDICIAL DISTRICT
> >
> >    PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION
> >
> >    TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
> >
> >    COMES NOW REGLAND, INC., Plaintiff in the above-numbered and styled
> >    cause, complaining of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> >    Numbers a/k/a ICANN and Louis Touton, individually, and for cause of
> >    action respectfully would show the following:
> >
> >                                      I.
> >
> >                             DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN
> >
> >    1.1       Plaintiff designates this case, under Texas Rule of Civil
> >    Procedure 190.3, to be governed by a Level 2 Discovery Control Plan.
> >
> >                                     II.
> >
> >                             PARTIES AND SERVICE
> >
> >    2.1       Plaintiff RegLand, Inc. ("RegLand" or "Plaintiff") is a
> >    corporation organized under the laws of the State of Texas.
> >
> >    2.2       Defendant Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> >    Numbers a/k/a ICANN ("ICANN") is a nonprofit corporation organized
> >    under the California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law, which
> >    may be served with process by delivering a copy of the citation
> >    together with this Plaintiff's Original Petition, upon its registered
> >    agent, CT Corporation System, 818 West Seventh St., Los Angeles,  CA.
> >    90017.
> >
> >    2.3       Defendant Louis Touton ("Touton") is an individual resident
> >    of the State of California, who may be served with process by
> >    delivering a copy of the citation together with this Plaintiff's
> >    Original Petition, upon him at his place of business located at 4676
> >    Admiralty Way #330, Marina Del Rey CA. 90292, or wherever he may be
> >    found.
> >
> >    III.
> >
> >    VENUE AND JURISDICTION
> >
> >    3.1       Venue is proper in Bexar County, Texas, because Bexar County
> >    is where all or a substantial part of the events or omissions giving
> >    rise to the claim occurred and/or plaintiff resided in Bexar County,
> >    Texas, at the time of the accrual of the cause of action.
> >
> >    3.2       Jurisdiction is proper in this Court because the amount in
> >    controversy is within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.
> >
> >    IV.
> >
> >    FACTUAL BACKGROUND
> >
> >    4.1       ICANN is a technical coordination body for the Internet.
> >    ICANN was created in October 1998 by a coalition of the Internet's
> >    business, technical, academic, and user communities.  The purpose
> >    behind the creation of ICANN was for it to assume responsibility for a
> >    set of functions previously performed under U.S. government contract
> >    by IANA and other groups. Specifically, ICANN is to coordinate the
> >    assignment of the following identifiers that must be globally unique
> >    for the Internet to function: Internet domain names; IP address
> >    numbers; protocol parameter and port numbers.  In addition, ICANN is
> >    supposed to coordinate the stable operation of the  Internet's root
> >    server system.  ICANN has no other authority or purpose.  ICANN's
> >    Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S. Department of Commerce
> >    specifically states that it shall not act unjustifiably or arbitrarily
> >    to injure particular persons or entities or particular categories of
> >    persons or entities.
> >
> >    4.2       When founded, ICANN was purportedly dedicated to preserving
> >    the operational stability of the Internet; to promoting competition;
> >    to achieving broad representation of global Internet communities; and
> >    to developing policy through private-sector, bottom-up,
> >    consensus-based means.  Regrettably, ICANN has become an instrument by
> >    which a few individuals attempt to impose their will upon the very
> >    communities they were supposed to serve.  One of those individuals is
> >    Touton.
> >
> >    4.3       Touton is Vice-President, Secretary, and General Counsel of
> >    ICANN.  Although neither ICANN's Articles of Incorporation or its
> >    By-Laws impute any policy-making authority upon Touton, due to his
> >    position, he wields considerable power and influence over the Internet
> >    community.  Touton is subjectively aware of this power and influence,
> >    which he uses to the detriment of those who defy him or his own view
> >    of what the Internet is or should be.
> >
> >    4.4       ICANN recently announced that it was considering the
> >    adoption of a variety of new generic top-level domain names ("New
> >    gTLDs").  New gTLDs were needed for the simple reason that domain
> >    names using the existing gTLDs were running out; that is, most of the
> >    common words and word combinations were no longer available.  In
> >    approximately August 2000, therefore, ICANN began the process for
> >    identifying which of various proposed New gTLDs would become
> >    officially available for use in registering domain names.  The process
> >    envisioned an expensive application procedure for the accreditation of
> >    Registries and Registrars.  ICANN was to control the entire process
> >    and collect the exorbitant fees.
> >
> >    4.5       Plaintiff is a start-up Internet corporation with a website
> >    located at the domain name www.regland.com  The founders of RegLand
> >    envisioned, and then created, a means by which individuals who wanted
> >    the best possible chance at obtaining domain names incorporating the
> >    New gTLDs would be able to have RegLand "stand in line" for them.  The
> >    system created by RegLand was premised on technology, namely, the
> >    creation of a database of RegLand's customers which, pursuant to
> >    contracts with Registrars, would be processed as soon as ICANN
> >    announced that a New gTLD was available for registration.  By contrast
> >    to the exorbitant fees charged by ICANN, RegLand charged its customers
> >    a nominal $20 for the privilege of entering a potential domain name
> >    into RegLand's database and taking advantage of RegLand's contractual
> >    relationships with Registrars.
> >
> >    4.6       RegLand's site makes abundantly clear that there are no
> >    guaranties or warranties with respect to the service offered by
> >    RegLand.  Indeed, every customer who purchased those services was
> >    required to "click-through" a contract which set forth (i) that none
> >    of the proposed New gTLDs might become available, (ii) that, if a New
> >    gTLD became available, there was no guaranty that RegLand's proposed
> >    system would result in registration, and (iii) that the entire
> >    relationship between RegLand and its customers was at the customer's
> >    risk.  In addition, when large orders were placed with RegLand, a
> >    member of its support staff would personally telephone the customer
> >    and reiterate the speculative nature of the situation.
> >
> >    4.7       On or about August 12, 2000, Scott Harris, of RegLand, met
> >    with Joseph Kibur at the main offices of NetNation, Inc. and Domain
> >    People, Inc. in Vancouver, Canada.  Mr. Kibur is one of the founders
> >    of, and a major stockholder in, NetNation, Inc.  Domain People, Inc.,
> >    a subsidiary of NetNation, Inc., is an ICANN accredited registrar.
> >    During the course of their meeting, the fact that ICANN had announced
> >    that it was exploring the introduction of New gTLDs into the root
> >    servers was discussed.  Mr. Kibur and Mr. Harris agreed that a service
> >    to assist in the registration of domain names incorporating the New
> >    gTLDs, would not only be profitable, but also helpful to the general
> >    public.  Mr. Kibur agreed that such a service, if it were started by
> >    Mr. Harris, would be able to market to the customers of Domain People,
> >    Inc. and such a service would also be allowed to use Domain People,
> >    Inc. to process registrations when the New gTLDs were introduced by
> >    ICANN.
> >
> >    4.8       Upon his return to San Antonio, Mr. Harris and Mr. Rick
> >    Hernandez founded RegLand for the purpose of implementing the idea
> >    discussed with Mr. Kibur.  Mr. Kibur left on an extended vacation to
> >    Ethiopia, Africa, but before leaving instructed Julia Dean, Domain
> >    People's business development manager, to complete a contract between
> >    Domain People, Inc. and RegLand.  Ms. Dean was excited about the
> >    possibilities of a contractual relationship with Regland because it
> >    would bring in both additional revenue as well as additional new
> >    customers to Domain People.  In early September, 2000, after
> >    finalizing the details of the contract between Domain People and
> >    Regland, Ms. Dean felt it would be prudent to contact ICANN to get
> >    verification that the contract with Regland would not violate any
> >    policies of, or Domain People's agreement with, ICANN.  Ms. Dean
> >    contacted Mr. Touton and during the course of this conversation, Mr.
> >    Touton informed Ms. Dean that ICANN was strongly against the type of
> >    service to be offered by RegLand, and implied that a contract with
> >    Regland would jeopardize Domain People's ability to register names in
> >    the New gTLDs and even its accreditation.  After reporting to the
> >    officers of Domain People the details of the conversation between Ms.
> >    Dean and Mr. Touton, Domain People's CEO, Ashley Sinclair, decided
> >    that, because of Mr. Touton's comments, it was too risky to enter into
> >    a contract with Regland.  On or about September 14, 2000, Ms. Dean
> >    contacted Mr. Harris and notified him that Domain People was backing
> >    out of their proposed contract altogether because they were fearful of
> >    ICANN and Mr. Touton.
> >
> >    4.9       The Defendants interference with RegLand's business did not
> >    stop with Domain People.  Indeed, shortly after RegLand launched its
> >    website, it learned from potential customers that ICANN was advising
> >    people that the RegLand service was a "fraud," a "scam," and was
> >    simply designed to take $20 from as many people as possible.  RegLand
> >    confirmed this by telephoning ICANN and hearing for itself these
> >    statements made by an employee of ICANN.
> >
> >    4.10     In addition, RegLand learned from other Registrars with whom
> >    RegLand had prospective contractual relationships with that Touton was
> >    advising Registrars that affiliation with RegLand would have a
> >    negative impact on such Registrar's application and accreditation with
> >    ICANN.  These comments by Touton had the effect of icing the potential
> >    market for RegLand with Registrars.
> >
> >    4.11     In the face of this information, RegLand's founders and its
> >    attorney contacted Touton to demand that ICANN and Touton immediately
> >    cease and desist from disparaging RegLand and from interfering with
> >    RegLand's prospective contracts and business relationships.  In the
> >    course of a 3-hour conference call with Touton, RegLand learned that
> >    Touton was aware that ICANN employees were disparaging RegLand, that
> >    Touton himself approved of this wrongful conduct, and that Touton
> >    intended to do nothing to stop the disparagement and defamation.
> >    However, Touton did state that he was aware of no ICANN policy or
> >    procedure that was being violated by RegLand, or which would be
> >    violated by any Registrar who entered into a contractual relationship
> >    with RegLand, and Touton stated that he would never advise a Registrar
> >    otherwise.  Finally, Touton suggested changes to the RegLand site
> >    which he deemed necessary to make the website meet with his approval.
> >    In recognition of Touton's power and influence, RegLand made all the
> >    changes suggested by Touton, even though they were not necessary for
> >    any other reason.
> >
> >    4.12     In the course of developing its business, RegLand had
> >    identified Register.com as a potential partner.  As a result, RegLand
> >    contacted Register.com and began negotiating a contract by which
> >    Register.com would serve as one of the Registrars through which
> >    RegLand's database of domain names with New gTLDs would be processed.
> >    In addition, RegLand became an affiliate of Register.com and displayed
> >    Register.com's logo on the RegLand site.  On or about September 27,
> >    2000, RegLand received a cease and desist letter from outside counsel
> >    for Register.com demanding that RegLand remove the Register.com logo
> >    from its website.  RegLand complied.  RegLand's counsel contacted
> >    Register.com's counsel to learn why the cease and desist letter was
> >    sent.  RegLand's counsel was told that Touton had contacted
> >    Register.com's counsel "screaming" at him and demanding to know why
> >    Register.com was on RegLand's website.  It was this conversation that
> >    precipitated RegLand's cease and desist letter to ICANN and Touton.
> >    Moreover, RegLand shortly thereafter received a communication directly
> >    from Register.com declining to meet with RegLand, although a
> >    communication just hours earlier had stated Register.com's interest in
> >    having a meeting to discuss a contractual relationship.
> >
> >    4.13     At approximately the same time, ICANN posted on its site a
> >    "warning" to visitors suggesting that taking advantage of the services
> >    of businesses such as RegLand was inappropriate because no one was
> >    "authorized" to pre-register domain names with the New gTLDs.  This
> >    statement was false and deceptive because it implied that
> >    authorization from ICANN was necessary, when, in fact, no such
> >    authorization is needed -- or even available.  Upon information and
> >    belief, the "warning" was not the result of the considered reflection
> >    of the board of ICANN, but was instead the result of Touton's personal
> >    decision to interfere with RegLand's business.
> >
> >    4.14     In the meantime, RegLand had begun negotiating a contract
> >    with Bulkregister.com, the second largest Registrar in the world.
> >    These negotiations proceeded to the point where execution of a
> >    contract was a reasonable probability.  Had the contract been
> >    executed, it would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of dollars
> >    in revenue and profit to RegLand.  However, at the last minute, after
> >    the essential terms of the contract were agreed upon, but before the
> >    contract could be executed, Bulkregister.com refused to consummate the
> >    deal.  Bulkregister.com's stated reason was the wrongful intimidation
> >    and defamatory statements by Touton and ICANN and its fear that
> >    affiliation with RegLand would have a negative impact on its
> >    applications pending before ICANN.
> >
> >    4.15     Upon information and belief, ICANN considered RegLand's
> >    situation at a recent meeting of its board of directors.  At the
> >    meeting, the board acknowledged that neither Touton nor ICANN has
> >    authority to make statements regarding RegLand's services.  However,
> >    in conscious disregard of the rights of RegLand, ICANN has failed and
> >    refused to remove the false and deceptive warning on its website, and
> >    has failed and refused to issue an apology to RegLand.
> >
> >    V.
> >
> >    FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION - DEFAMATION
> >
> >    5.1       RegLand restates and incorporates by reference the factual
> >    allegations in paragraphs 4.1 to 4.15 above as if fully set forth
> >    herein.
> >
> >    5.2       ICANN and Touton made false, defamatory statements of and
> >    concerning RegLand, with knowledge that such statements were false or
> >    with reckless disregard as to the truth of such statements.
> >
> >    5.3       ICANN and Touton's defamation of RegLand has proximately
> >    caused actual damages to be suffered by RegLand, for which actual
> >    damages RegLand hereby sues.
> >
> >    5.4       ICANN and Touton's defamatory statements were made with
> >    malice and, therefore, it is appropriate for RegLand to recover
> >    exemplary damages in addition to its actual damages, for which
> >    exemplary damages RegLand hereby sues.
> >
> >    VI.
> >
> >    SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION - BUSINESS DISPARAGEMENT
> >
> >    6.1       RegLand restates and incorporates by reference the factual
> >    allegations in paragraphs 4.1 to 4.15 above as if fully set forth
> >    herein.
> >
> >    6.2       ICANN and Touton made false and disparaging statements of
> >    and concerning the services of RegLand, with knowledge that such
> >    statements were false or with reckless disregard as to the truth of
> >    such statements.
> >
> >    6.3       ICANN and Touton's business disparagement of RegLand has
> >    proximately caused actual damages to be suffered by RegLand, for which
> >    actual damages RegLand hereby sues.
> >
> >    6.4       ICANN and Touton's business disparagement was with malice
> >    and, therefore, it is appropriate for RegLand to recover exemplary
> >    damages in addition to its actual damages, for which exemplary damages
> >    RegLand hereby sues.
> >
> >    VII.
> >
> >    THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION - TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE
> >
> >    7.1       RegLand restates and incorporates by reference the factual
> >    allegations in paragraphs 4.1 to 4.15 above as if fully set forth
> >    herein.
> >
> >    7.2       ICANN and Touton's conduct interfered with prospective
> >    contracts and prospective business relations between RegLand and
> >    various Registrars, and between RegLand and its customers and
> >    potential customers.
> >
> >    7.3       ICANN and Touton's tortious interference has proximately
> >    caused actual damages to be suffered by RegLand, for which actual
> >    damages RegLand hereby sues.
> >
> >    7.4       ICANN and Touton's tortious interference was committed with
> >    malice and, therefore, it is appropriate for RegLand to recover
> >    exemplary damages in addition to its actual damages, for which
> >    exemplary damages RegLand hereby sues.
> >
> >    VIII.
> >
> >    JURY DEMAND
> >
> >    Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.
> >
> >    WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, REGLAND, INC., plaintiff herein, prays
> >    that the defendants be cited to appear and answer herein, and that
> >    upon final hearing the Court award judgment in favor of Plaintiff and
> >    against Defendants, jointly and severally, for actual damages,
> >    exemplary damages, pre-judgment interest and post-judgment interest,
> >    together with such other and further relief, both general and special,
> >    at law and in equity, to which Plaintiff may show itself justly
> >    entitled.
> >
> >    Respectfully submitted,
> >
> >    JACKSON WALKER L.L.P.
> >
> >    901 Main Street, Suite 6000
> >
> >    Dallas, Texas 75201
> >
> >    (214) 953-6000
> >
> >    (214) 953-5822 (fax)
> >
> >    By:___________________________
> >
> >                Alan N. Greenspan
> >
> >                State Bar No. 08402975
> >
> >    OF COUNSEL
> >
> >    Cynthia L. Beverage
> >
> >    State Bar No. 00787076
> >
> >    Jackson Walker L.L.P.
> >
> >    112 E. Pecan St., Suite 2100
> >
> >    San Antonio, Texas 78205
> >
> >    (210) 978-7700
> >
> >    (210) 978-7790 (fax)
> 
> Regards,
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> 
> 

-- 
Joe Baptista

                                        http://www.dot.god/
                                        dot.GOD Hostmaster
                                        +1 (805) 753-8697