[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[icann-eu] Re: Johnson v. Verisign 'flip levin' email archive removed...
- To: icann board address <icann-board@icann.org>
- Subject: [icann-eu] Re: Johnson v. Verisign 'flip levin' email archive removed...
- From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:00:11 -0700
- CC: ICANN-EU <icann-europe@fitug.de>, Roger Cochetti <RCochetti@verisign.com>, Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>, General Assembly of the DNSO <ga@dnso.org>
- Comment: This message comes from the icann-europe mailing list.
- Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10105221750200.29821-100000@spitfire.law.miami.edu> <10554037664.20010522152144@userfriendly.com> <018e01c0e36f$c881d200$c71121c2@sharpuk.co.uk> <3B0BB6BF.DC31A0C5@ix.netcom.com> <031e01c0e37c$ab4d65c0$c71121c2@sharpuk.co.uk>
- Sender: owner-icann-europe@fitug.de
David and all,
David Howe wrote:
> > David, I agree with your sentiment here. But what is really more
> > important is that VRSN/NSI actually removed the post form the
> > Archives of the Domain-Policy (This list) list.
> Not entirely sure here - if it is an ongoing legal action, and the message
> was on a site they did *not* control they would presumably have sent a
> "takedown" legal threatening letter to the person controlling that site (if
> that person would then have taken down the post is besides the point)
> The problem is the non-transparency issue - they are removing posts without
> notifying the list, the original poster, (presumably) the list admin, or
> leaving behind a notice stating why, who and when it was done.
It is an ongoing legal action just recently filed (See thread subject
of
this thread). Domain-Policy list is a list that NSOL/VRSN does control.
So they can do whatever they wish with this ML . But that was really
not my point. It is the FACT that they did it at all under whatever
conditions or circumstances or for what ever reasons that is troubling.
Especially after the removal from the Domain-Policy List archives
was noticed and than reported. My second point which you snipped,
was regarding the lack of action or concern that has been shown
thus far by the ICANN BoD and to a lesser extent DOC.
> This is
> partly an extension to the "my email server, my rules" email argument I was
> fast-deleting yesterday (was that here or nanog?); doing something openly is
> one thing (if it is your hardware, you get to choose, and anyone who needs
> to can vote with their feet) but doing it secretly like this is quite
> another.
Agreed. But they are trying to cover their tracks. It didn't work
this
time though... They got caught! Now the question is, what is the ICANN
BoD going to do about it, and what if the ICANN BoD doesn't take action,
is DOC going to do about this, if anything?
My bet. Neither the ICANN BoD or DOC will do anything...
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k 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 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208