RE: [wg-review] Comments on review of DNSO by Mr Park
> Different voices in the ICANN orbit sometimes argue that there are
> vast unrepresented blocks of Internet users whose rights are being
> abused, but there is no actual evidence that this is the case, and
> lots of evidence to the contrary
> Pilar Luque wrote:- I could not disagree more. The evidence is that
participation is very
> low if we take into account the vast majority of Internet stakeholders
> in the world. In the ccTLD Constituency, to cite the example I know
> best, only 40 ccTLD assist to such meetings out of 240 ccTLD worldwide.
Bret Busby wrote:- I have not previously been aware of point 2, above.
I take issue with this (as a person whose rights, or, reasonable
expectations have been abused, and, who has found that he has no
redress), for a few reasons, one being the highly discriminatory UDRP,
which favours the large corporations and the pirates, and, another being
the monopolies created by ICANN, in authorising only single registrars
for each ccTLD, to the detriment of all the citizens in each country,
due to the lack of competition, created by ICANN.
Apart from these, it is a reasonable expectation to expect a body with
the role of ICANN, to acknowledge and respond to emails that voice
concerns with the system, but, when a body such as ICANN, refuses to
either acknowledge or respond to such emails, then ICANN indicates that
it regards itself as absolute, and, beyond reproach. That is an abuse.
I am aware of a ccTLD registrar, that has exercised fraud, by
proclaiming its domain to be a gTLD, and, promoting the domain to be
such. This has been brought to the awareness of ICANN, and, to the USA
Internet fraud people, set up by the FBI, but, I have not been advised
of any definite action taken by either body, to stop the fraud. The
ccTLD registrar was located in the USA (NOT the .us ccTLD regisrar),
hence the bringing it to the attention of the FBI Internet fraud agency.
When such crimes are knowingly allowed to be practised on the Internet,
by the powers that authorise the regiatrars, then, rights are being
knowingly abused, and, the practice condoned.
There is no means, of which I am aware, to deal with any complaints
about rights, and, reasonable expectations, being abused on the
Internet, the abuses occurring in ways such as I have mentioned here,
and, previously, on this mailing list. There is therefore no means to
quantify such problems.
The contention above, that no evidence of abuses exist, and that much
evidence exists to the contrary, is, therefore, in my opinion, in the
[Joanna] I am inclined to agree with the substance of both of the above
comments, if not all details.
Could Ms Park please clarify her foundation for the original statement and
consider revising this to take into account members comments?
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html