Re: [atlarge-discuss] Challenge from Ross Rader

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

Hello Ross

Tucows - reseller - SPY PRODUCTIONS - .info sunrise - they put in the fake
TM numbers for their customers (made up the numbers themselves - the
customers didn't do it - outcome: loss to many other LR1 customers
worldwide - action taken by Tucows? - are Spy Productions still trading
through you - yes

Since the registrar community did not protect the interests of individual
users in this case (or in the case of the 200+ Yesnic fake Sunrise
registrations, or the Joker ones, or the "2040" registrations also
registered through Tucows, where customers were actually told NOT to worry
if they didn't have a TM but to go ahead and apply in the .info Sunrise - in
short, for these reasons and hundreds of others:

OF COURSE the biggest constituency of all, the hundreds of millions of
ordinary internet users, should have representation on the ICANN Board,
because other constituencies in ICANN's discredited process have failed to
take action against these abuses.

CHALLENGE to ROSS RADER : what accountability has Tucows taken for the Spy
Productions fakes or the other reseller fakes, and incitement to fake? What
actions did Tucows take in these cases? How did Tucows actions protect the
individual user or redress the wrong they suffered? In short, is the DNS
administered for the benefit of registrars or for the benefit of the
worldwide community?

Incidentally, I have no big axe to grind against Tucows. I quite like
Tucows. There are many less ethical registrars than Tucows. But as
demonstrated, even Tucows has failed to take action to protect individual
users in these cases. And others are far worse. There are many other aspects
of ICANN's work which impact upon users. I have just referred to the New TLD
process as a "demonstation" of one of these areas where it is so vital to
have the voice of ordinary users represented in ICANN.

Richard Henderson

----- Original Message -----
From: Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>
To: <ross@byte.org>; <DannyYounger@cs.com>
Cc: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 12:38 AM
Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Challenge from Ross Rader


> At 06:02 p.m. 22/08/2002 -0400, DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
> > From Ross Rader's byte.org blog:
> >
> >"I asked the question a week ago, but still don't "get" the answers. A
few
> >people included me in a thread going on over on the at-large discussion
list
> >regarding what the arguments for and against individual participation in
> >ICANN actually are. The answers coming back weren't all that convincing -
all
> >I managed to take away was that users are entitled to a seat because they
use
> >the system. Not terribly convincing. Convince me."
>
> Ross,
>
> Imagine for a moment that you are not a registrar, but a registrant.
>
> Then read you own Tucows DN registration contract or the contract of any
> other registrar.
> Do you not think you would have written that contract a litte differently
> if you were the Representative of the Registrants, authorised to negotiate
> such a Registrar contract on behalf of the registrants?
> How about clauses that allow deletions at the registrar's sole discretion?
> Liability exclusions for gross neglect?
>
> I may be able to convince you as an Individual, but in this debate you are
> a Registrar, the *other* contracting party.
> Of course the Registration industry cannot be "convinced" that  unilateral
> contracts of adhesion with captive customers are not a great idea.
> I'm afraid more than convincing is needed.
>
> --Joop
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de