At 5/12/04 8:23 AM, James M Woods wrote:
>The new rules were set to be released at the end of March (with the
>understanding that registrars would have 90 days to implement) , but
>ICANN has delayed the release of the new rules for reasons unknown. We
>are eagerly awaiting for a new release date but have no line of sight
>as to when this might be.
>
>The last note from ICANN regarding this topic can be found here :
>http://www.icann.org/transfers/index.html
What a delightful letter from the honest folks at Network Solutions, who
have only the registrant's interests at heart.
In particular, this paragraph demonstrates their sincerity:
>Let us be candid. The changes ICANN has adopted were aimed at breaking a
>monopoly that no longer exists. I will not argue that the transfer policy
>was abused at that time. However, the abuse today is coming from
>fraudulent transfers, not from denials of transfers.
Well, yes, let us be candid. For example, let's look at the sentence "I
will not argue that the transfer policy was abused at that time." This
sounds an awful lot like "mistakes were made", as if someone else had
abused the transfer policy -- but as it turns out, NSI was, and is, one
of the biggest violators. Let's all recall how Verisign once sent notices
resembling invoices to WHOIS contacts, just like Domain Registry of
America:
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2003/09/networksolutions.htm
Just so it's perfectly clear, the deceptive practices that NSI is asking
ICANN to protect them from are THE SAME DECEPTIVE PRACTICES THE FTC SAYS
NSI USED THEMSELVES when it was to their advantage. This fact alone
should eliminate their claim from being taken seriously.
That's just the best-documented example, of course; NSI has demonstrated
plenty of other deceptive and misleading practices with regard to denying
transfers that I know for a fact have been approved by the WHOIS admin
contact. And they're still doing it: they don't provide AUTH codes for
EPP transfers unless you call them, and then they won't send them to
anyone but the private contact e-mail address that doesn't appear in
WHOIS (the admin contact can't get them). Even an RRP transfer requires
approval by both the admin contact (on the gaining side) AND the
invisible private contact (on the losing side), which is apparently being
done for no reason other than make it harder to approve legitimate
transfers -- it means that the gaining registrar has no idea where the
NSI approval messages are going, so you can't really help people who want
to transfer and don't get the messages.
Perhaps their next sentence is more honest: "However, the abuse today is
coming from fraudulent transfers, not from denials of transfers." Nope,
guess not: that's a sack of utter crap. Denials of transfers are a far
bigger problem than fraudulent transfers -- and almost the entire
fraudulent transfer problem is now coming from Domain Registry of
America, who can be trivially stopped if anyone at ICANN actually wishes
to do anything about it.
To say this delay is discouraging is an understatement.
-- Robert L Mathews, Tiger Technologies http://www.tigertech.net/"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." -- Darwin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:37:57 EDT