[Registrants-rights] Registrars and Resellers
Hugh Dierker
hdierker2204 at yahoo.com
Sat Jul 17 11:28:28 CDT 2010
I read this and it makes perfect sense until you read it without just assuming
it is Bureaucrateese for refusal to take personal responsibility.
Note my highlighted portion --- What is the "Concern of Governments" if not the
well being and safe haven of the Citizen?
Perhaps during these troubled times the UK government is concerned for
themselves and not the citizenry, kind of Barricade the Castle for they are
trying to get us??
Certainly in what we would call dictatorships, tyrants and strict Monarchs --
Mr. Carvell would be correct - the interest or concern of the Government would
be different than that of the citizens. But one would hope that in enlightened
democratic type republics his job would be to see to the welfare of citizens and
not his boss. Of course we are not naives who are nieve*,,, probably like most
ICANN staffers they view their job as keeping their job and status in society.
*good luck with certainty in spelling that word
________________________________
From: Carvell Mark (IE) <Mark.Carvell at bis.gsi.gov.uk>
To: Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com>
Cc: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204 at yahoo.com>; crawley and sons
<crawleyandsons at eircom.net>; registrants-rights at atlarge-lists.icann.org;
cgomes at verisign.com; ssene at ntia.doc.gov; icann-board at icann.org;
jeffrey at icann.org; ray at beckermanlegal.com; rod_beckstrom at icann.org;
maria.farrell at icann.org; avri at acm.org; alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org;
nick.ashton-hart at icann.org; frederic.teboul at icann.org; lehto.paul at gmail.com;
mueller at syr.edu; dam at icann.org; robert.smith1 at infragard.org;
Brenbe at consumer.org; baptista at publicroot.org; edward at hasbrouck.org;
frank.fowlie at icann.org; Irish Roofing Experts <irishroofing at gmail.com>;
drgovind at nic.in; ranjan at eis.ernet.in
Sent: Mon, July 12, 2010 4:54:34 AM
Subject: RE: [Registrants-rights] Registrars and Resellers
Dear Mr Williams
I refer to your e-mail to Mr Crawford and I think I ought to make clear that,
consistent with the Operating Principles of the Governmental Advisory
Committee, the role of GAC national representatives is to consider public
policy issues as they relate to the concerns of governments, multinational
governmental organisations and treaty organisations, and to advise the Board
of ICANN accordingly. That role does not extend to intervening in individual
disputes such as the one describe in your e-mail exchange with Mr Crawley. The
most I can do is wish all the parties well in reaching agreement and resolving
such disputes, through whatever means that are available to them.
Yours sincerely
Mark Carvell
UK Representative on the Governmental Advisory Committee to ICANN
Head International Communications Policy
Information Economy Directorate
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
Tel: +44 (0)20 7215 1803
FAX: +44 (0)20 7215 5442
E-mail: mark.carvell at bis.gsi.gov.uk
The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) is building a dynamic
and competitive UK economy by creating the conditions for business success;
promoting innovation, enterprise and science; and giving everyone the skills
and opportunities to succeed. To achieve this we will foster world-class
universities and promote an open global economy. BIS - Investing in our future
________________________________
From: Jeffrey A. Williams [mailto:jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com]
>Sent: 06 July 2010 20:48
>To: Irish Roofing Experts; Carvell Mark (IE); drgovind at nic.in;
>ranjan at eis.ernet.in
>Cc: Hugh Dierker; crawley and sons;
>registrants-rights at atlarge-lists.icann.org; cgomes at verisign.com;
>ssene at ntia.doc.gov; icann-board at icann.org; jeffrey at icann.org;
>ray at beckermanlegal.com; rod_beckstrom at icann.org; maria.farrell at icann.org;
>avri at acm.org; alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org; nick.ashton-hart at icann.org;
>frederic.teboul at icann.org; lehto.paul at gmail.com; mueller at syr.edu;
>dam at icann.org; robert.smith1 at infragard.org; Brenbe at consumer.org;
>baptista at publicroot.org; edward at hasbrouck.org; frank.fowlie at icann.org
>Subject: Re: [Registrants-rights] Registrars and Resellers
>
>
>Peter and all,
>
> Again I am sorry and obviously concerned about the abuse an American based
>company, GoDaddy inflicted upon
>you and your business by what seems to be errant and intently abusive
>business tactics. You still have the
>ability to use the UDRP to recover your Domain Names that GoDaddy seemingly
>or allegedly re-sold that were
>rightly and contractually legally registered to you. Affilias has in the
>past along with a number of other ICANN
>Accredited Registrars effected the same back in 2003 and denied the ruling of
>the UDRP when they were
>found to have acted improperly accordingly. Otherwise your only other course
>of possible action might be
>to get in contact with your UN representative or local government official
>regarding your plight. ICANN is
>not likely to stand up in your behalf even though they have acknowledged that
>you were wronged as GoDaddy
>is the single largest financial contributor to their financial coffers.
>
> You might also try contacting the US Department of State regarding this
>alleged transgression by GoDaddy
>and see if there is any assistance that they can or are willing to provide.
>Keep after them if you decide to do so.
>Additionally contacting your GAC representative with your alleged grievance
>might also be another avenue
>for you to consider. I have included your ICANN GAC rep. in this 'TO' list
>in this response as a 'Head's
>Up' as it were. I am sure that Mr. Carvell will be more than willing to
>review your alleged greivence accordingly.
>
> To conclude I fully realize that none of the suggestion I have offered you
>will in any reasonable amount of
>time properly or satisfactorly correct the your alleged greivence, but
>perhaps may eventually do so. Again
>let me again personally express my regret, dismay and displeasure as an
>American citizen and domain
>name holder, GoDaddy's seemingly improper and irresponsible behavior in your
>regard as such behavior
>reflects badly on all Americans accordingly.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Irish Roofing Experts
>>Sent: Jul 5, 2010 8:29 PM
>>To: "Jeffrey A. Williams"
>>Cc: Hugh Dierker , crawley and sons ,
>>registrants-rights at atlarge-lists.icann.org, cgomes at verisign.com,
>>ssene at ntia.doc.gov, icann-board at icann.org, jeffrey at icann.org,
>>ray at beckermanlegal.com, rod_beckstrom at icann.org, maria.farrell at icann.org,
>>avri at acm.org, alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org, nick.ashton-hart at icann.org,
>>frederic.teboul at icann.org, lehto.paul at gmail.com, mueller at syr.edu,
>>dam at icann.org, robert.smith1 at infragard.org, Brenbe at consumer.org,
>>baptista at publicroot.org, edward at hasbrouck.org, frank.fowlie at icann.org
>>
>>Subject: Re: [Registrants-rights] Registrars and Resellers
>>
>>Dear Sir,
>>
>>I have spent a lot of time reading through the ICANN web site, I do not
>>claim to have understood everything I have read in fact some of the content
>>is downright confusing.
>>
>>Naturally the topic I have been most interested in has been recovering
>>domains, I am not surprised that using the search term "domain theft by a
>>registrar" does not return much information however from what I have seen
>>and read I do expect it to become a hot topic in the near future.
>>
>>My reason for the above conclusion is there is more money to be made by
>>reselling domain names especially generic terms and the large registrars
>>who use unregulated resellers are in the ideal position to harvest them
>>from the resellers accounts.
>>
>>It has been pointed out to me that the system will remain "as is" because
>>the average consumer like me does not carry out much if any research into
>>exactly what they are buying when they pay corporations like Go Daddy or a
>>reseller their $7.00 > $10.00 to register a domain.
>>
>>To add to the status quo many who lose domains do so through their own
>>fault and even when in doubt they look on the loss as $7.00 so why bother
>>trying to fight a giant like the Go Daddy Group over $7.00 especially when
>>the regulator ICANN is not willing to assist the consumer?
>>
>>Having read as much as I have on the workings of ICANN it is obvious that
>>the Accredited Registrars are actually running ICANN, best description I
>>can think of is "The Tail Wagging The Dog".
>>
>>When looking through members of the working groups it has become clear why
>>the Go Daddy Group would have more than one Accredited Registrar, they are
>>paying the extra fees and compliance costs to have more than one vote at
>>the table.
>>
>>While the Go Daddy Group have stolen my domains their tactics are to be
>>admired, they have recognised that ICANN are nothing more or less than
>>puppets to be manipulated by using their own rules.
>>
>>I do not have the up to date figures but I think I am not far out when I
>>say there are over 100 million domain names registered among less than
>>1,000 Accredited Registrars, The Go Daddy Group have used very good
>>marketing to control some 36 million of the registered domains.
>>
>>I believe that for as long as the best answer ICANN can come up with for
>>any dispute with an Accredited Registrar is contact a Lawyer and the best
>>answer for a dispute with a Reseller is contact the Registrar because ICANN
>>does not regulate resellers the Accredited Registrars will continue to milk
>>the cash cow.
>>
>>ICANN have no system in place which regulates for simple Right from Wrong
>>on the part of an Accredited Registrar, I believe it will take time but the
>>day will come when an Accredited Registrar will annoy the wrong person and
>>Governments will intervene to regulate ICANN.
>>
>>I am not advocating intervention by any Government, as has been seen with
>>the world economies they have plenty of things to make a mess of but when
>>all else fails the average John Citizen tends to resort to the people who
>>will listen,
>>
>>What I find interesting is since I started using www.ecosolarheat.net and
>>www.ecosolarheating.net to show the difference between a Registrar,
>>Reseller and ICANN I have not been able to get a reply from the Two ICANN
>>Representatives who oversaw the theft of the two .com domains.
>>
>>To the two Gents one of whom is on this mailing list I say, Sorry Gents but
>>burying your heads in the sand will not make this problem go away.
>>
>>Jeffrey,
>>
>>I agree resorting to the legal system in civil court may not have the
>>desired effect of having my domains returned however it may generate enough
>>publicity to wake up the Board in ICANN.
>>
>>Just sorry I'm not in the USA where such a lawsuit would attract enough
>>attention to get the public interested and informed.
>>
>>Of course all of the above will be irrelevant when businesses will be using
>>.googleHmmm did I just predict the future?
>>
>>Yours Sincerely,
>>
>>Peter Crawley.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 4 July 2010 23:04, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>Dear Peter and all,
>>>
>>> I for one am very sorry you were abused in this manner and your domains
>>>should be restored
>>>immediately by GoDaddy accordingly. However given the details which you
>>>kindly and seemingly
>>>accurately related this is unlikely. Your only recourse is either sue
>>>GoDaddy in civil court
>>>or file a UDRP complaint at this juncture, nither of which are good
>>>and/or effective options
>>>accordingly.
>>>
>>> Many times GoDaddy has enguaged in similar or the exact same sort of
>>>abuses as have other
>>>ICANN accredited Registrars and just as often after notifying ICANN
>>>directly of these abuses
>>>ICANN has been unwilling to take corrective action, let alone adaquately monitor
>>>the activities
>>>of their Accredited Registrars and Registries even though the monitoring
>>>software has been
>>>avaliable for quite a few years by which they could do so effectively.
>>> Registrants are left
>>>as a result open to the fact that ICANN is enabeling some Registrars in
>>>this abusive activity
>>>accordingly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204 at yahoo.com>
>>>>Sent: Jul 4, 2010 1:55 PM
>>>>To: crawley and sons <crawleyandsons at eircom.net>,
>>>>registrants-rights at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>>Subject: Re: [Registrants-rights] Registrars and Resellers
>>>>
>>>>Mr. Crawley,
>>>>
>>>>At least you can now rest assured that you are not alone in your
>>>>experience and troubles. Many have shared similar or down right exactly
>>>>the same story here for the past 10 years.
>>>>
>>>>The problem is not found at ICANN or governments or Registrars or
>>>>resellers. The problem is found in your second paragraph.
>>>>"being busy looking after my own business and customers I never had
>>>>reason"
>>>>
>>>>That is it in a nutshell. No one does more than what you describe.
>>>> There are avenues open, such as you found here, to organize and develop
>>>>a constituency that is reflective and advocative of your concerns.
>>>> Registrants for myriad of reasons, refuse, fail and cannot form a group
>>>>to correct the problems you set forth. They deal with them in
>>>>frustration and then get back to their business or being busy.
>>>>
>>>>So no, you are basically wrong in your conclusion. Governments work for
>>>>people and in return people must work for governance. The problems will
>>>>not create or justify a solution only effort and some cohesive work will
>>>>stem the abuses you relate.
>>>>
>>>>Now get back to your busyness ;-) Just kidding, we always learn from
>>>>examples such as the one you were kind enough to post here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>________________________________
>>>>From: crawley and sons <crawleyandsons at eircom.net>
>>>>To: registrants-rights at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>>Sent: Fri, July 2, 2010 6:42:52 PM
>>>>Subject: [Registrants-rights] Registrars and Resellers
>>>>
>>>>Dear Sirs,
>>>>
>>>>As a business owner I find the unregulated confict of interest issues
>>>>among some Registrars and the total disregard of the Registrant as
>>>>unbelievable.
>>>>
>>>>I had my business domains registered through a reseller, of course with
>>>>the professional looking templates available to him and being busy
>>>>looking after my own business and customers I never had reason to know
>>>>there was a difference between a Reseller and a Registrar.
>>>>
>>>>The Reseller went through a stage of very bad health (it can happen to
>>>>humans), having failed to get replies to my emails regarding the renewal
>>>>of the domains I sought the advice of a professional web site builder.
>>>>
>>>>He was able to tell me who the real Registrar was Wild West Domains, I
>>>>tried to contact them directly to renew my domains but the emails were
>>>>ignored except for the Auto Reply feature.
>>>>
>>>>My advisor suggested requesting the domains be transferred using the
>>>>services of one of the (claimed) largest registrars in the USA Go
>>>>Daddy.com who it transpired is also an affiliate of the original
>>>>Registrar.
>>>>
>>>>Of course they took my money to transfer the domains which were still
>>>>well inside the redemption period but nothing was happening except my
>>>>domains were then showing an advertising page for the very registrar I
>>>>had paid to transfer them into a safe account where I could use them once
>>>>again.
>>>>
>>>>I manged to contact a gentleman on one of the few email addresses listed
>>>>on the ICANN web site, in fairness he replied both by email and
>>>>telephone.
>>>>
>>>>The result was I now could get replies from the original Registrar Wild
>>>>West Domains, but nothing positive or helpful just the bare minimum to be
>>>>able to say they replied to my emails very much the same as Go Daddy
>>>>replies.
>>>>
>>>>Having made the connection between the original registrar and the one I
>>>>was trusting (and paid) to carry out the transfer I was sending duplicate
>>>>emails begging for help which was not forthcoming because I could not
>>>>access the Resellers account.
>>>>
>>>>What is interesting are the Lies I was told by support for Go Daddy and
>>>>Wild West Domains, they claimed they could not access the Resellers
>>>>account, I do not use the word lies lightly however I now have proof
>>>>witnessed by an ICANN representative that they could and in fact did
>>>>access the Resellers Account at a later time.
>>>>
>>>>On the last day the Registrar's change department sent me the document
>>>>that would allow the domains to be transferred back to my care, the
>>>>amount of paperwork and the manner I had to reply was nothing short of
>>>>obstructing any chance of progress.
>>>>
>>>>Of course the next day they reduced the amount of paper work to one page
>>>>and easy to establish proof of identity, it appears that as soon as the
>>>>best Domains had been transferred away the Go Daddy Group decided my
>>>>credit card details, and PIN number in their accounts system actually
>>>>stood for something.
>>>>
>>>>The two .com domains had been sold by the Go Daddy Group's internal
>>>>auction system for a substantial sum of money at one minute passed the
>>>>redemption period, of course I should have known something was wrong as
>>>>the first form was partly completed in favour of a corporate name I had
>>>>never seen before.
>>>>
>>>>The Go Daddy Group have made it clear to me that I will not get my
>>>>domains back, ICANN are playing the role the three brass monkeys (blind,
>>>>deaf and dumb), despite the ICANN Representative having been in receipt
>>>>of all email correspondence and assurances that he could get my domains
>>>>restored to me.
>>>>
>>>>I believe the fact that the Go Daddy Group could appoint a Reseller then
>>>>claim they are not responsible for the actions of Resellers amounts to
>>>>nothing less than abuse of the status and role of a Regstrar, there is no
>>>>other commercial enterprise that I am aware of where a Licence holder
>>>>(Accredited Registrar) can appoint Agents / Franchises / Sub Contractors
>>>>or Sub Offices and claim no responsibility fot the conduct of the
>>>>management.
>>>>
>>>>The Reseller is not responsible to anyone, he / she has no contact or
>>>>contract with ICANN, yet they are allowed to register domain names that
>>>>so many businesses depend on to trade, We the General Public / Consumers
>>>>can not be expected to know the difference between a Reseller and
>>>>Accredited Registrar or the many rules laid down by ICANN, in fact most
>>>>of 100 million domain owners may never have heard of ICANN.
>>>>
>>>>Sorry but the www is too big and too important to the world economy to be
>>>>left in the control of Registrars who refuse to accept responsibility for
>>>>the actions of their Employees / Agents (Resellers) and provide
>>>>consumer's with the necessary help to recover their domains when their
>>>>Reseller system fails.
>>>>
>>>>I also believe it is totally unacceptable to allow an Accredited
>>>>Registrar to run a business where they use the inside information to pass
>>>>on domains that appear to be expiring to an "In House" Auction System,
>>>>the problems that arise from such "Conflicts of Interest" lead to domains
>>>>being sold to maximise the returns for the group at the expense of the
>>>>consumer.
>>>>
>>>>The Go Daddy Group and their Reseller system appear to be everything that
>>>>is wrong with the Registry system, they appear to believe they are
>>>>untouchable by ICANN, in fact it looks like the Go Daddy Group believe
>>>>they are more powerful than ICANN.
>>>>
>>>>I believe if ICANN do not begin to Police the Registrars it is only a
>>>>matter of time before Governments will have to step in and protect the
>>>>consumers and business.
>>>>
>>>>Yours Sincerely,
>>>>
>>>>Peter Crawley
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Registrants-rights mailing list
>>>>Registrants-rights at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registrants-rights_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>RAAWGOnline: https://st.icann.org/RAA-Policy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Registrants-rights mailing list
>>>>Registrants-rights at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registrants-rights_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>RAAWGOnline: https://st.icann.org/RAA-Policy
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Jeffrey A. Williams
>>>Spokesman for INEGroupLLA. - (Over 300+k members/stakeholders and
>>>growing, strong!)
>>>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>>> Abraham Lincoln
>>>
>>>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
>very
>>>often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>>>
>>>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
>>>liability
>>>depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
>>>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
>>>United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
>>>===============================================================
>>>Updated 1/26/04
>>>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
>>>Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
>>>ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
>>>jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
>>>Phone: 214-244-4827
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Registrants-rights mailing list
>>>Registrants-rights at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registrants-rights_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>
>>>
>>>RAAWGOnline: https://st.icann.org/RAA-Policy
>>>
>>
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Jeffrey A. Williams
>>Spokesman for INEGroupLLA. - (Over 300+k members/stakeholders and growing,
>>strong!)
>>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>> Abraham Lincoln
>>
>>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
>>often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>>
>>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
>>liability
>>depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
>>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
>>United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
>>===============================================================
>>Updated 1/26/04
>>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
>>Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
>>ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
>>jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
>>Phone: 214-244-4827
This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government
Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in
partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case
of problems, please call your organisation’s IT Helpdesk.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure
Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in
partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving
the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
More information about the Registrants-rights
mailing list