[At-Large] Transparency & the ICANN Contractual Compliance Newsletter

[Danny Younger]

Dear Ms. Burnette,

Thank you for your response.  We look forward to your
participation on the upcoming NARALO monthly
teleconference and to a frank discussion on the state
of negotiations as they pertain to the planned
registrar sanctions program (first described in the
"Improved Contractual Compliance Enforcement Tools"
proposed amendment to the RAA).

Best wishes,
Danny Younger



--- Stacy Burnette <stacy.burnette at icann.org> wrote:

> Dear Mr. Younger:
> 
> Thank you for writing me regarding your concerns
> related to transparency.  ICANN is committed to
> transparency and accountability.
> 
> To ensure that you are provided complete
> information, I need additional time to respond to
> the questions posed below.  On or before 30 April
> 2008, I will respond to all of the questions
> presented in your electronic mail message dated 3
> April 2008.
> 
> Thanks for your support.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Stacy Burnette
> Director
> Contractual Compliance
> ICANN
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 1:34 PM
> To: Stacy Burnette
> Cc: At-Large Worldwide
> Subject: Transparency & the ICANN Contractual
> Compliance Newsletter
> 
> Dear Ms. Burnette,
> 
> I am appreciative of the fact that ICANN has
> generated
> this newsletter, but I have a number of concerns
> related to transparency.
> 
> We are told that during 2007 a total of 164 breach
> of
> contract notices were sent to registrars.  While
> this
> effort is to be commended, users would assuredly
> want
> to know which registrars are in breach of contract
> (and for what reason) at any given point in time so
> that they can make informed choices regarding which
> registration providers to use.
> 
> Hiding this valuable information from consumers is
> not
> what I would deem to be a public service, rather, I
> view it as a profound disservice.  While it does
> serve
> to protect the interest of registrars, it most
> certainly doesn't serve to properly protect the
> public.
> 
> May I ask why ICANN has chosen to conceal this
> information?  Is this behavior owing to a deliberate
> policy decision that has been made by ICANN Staff?
> Does Staff intend to continue concealing registrar
> contract breaches at the expense of the registrant
> community, or can we expect this situation to change
> in the immediate future?
> 
> Hopefully you can help us to better understand the
> situation and the Staff perspective on transparency.
> 
> best regards,
> Danny Younger
> 
> 
> 
>      
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one
> month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.
> http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com