Well said! Since I have been accused of trolling, fear mongering etc I will not post this openly. I strongly believe their should be some form of consumer protection at registry level, exactly the excuse used by the IRT crowd to justify why brands should be protected. Right now I can pull up a list of "bnk" names - yes banks, all spoofing banks. That said, it does not stop there. There may or may not be a trademark involved, yet the same party may indiscriminately spoof real institutions (and mark) or create totally fictitious banks or companies for various types of fraud. Proven is that the whois is bogus, steals id's of real people (sometimes even their credit card details and funds :( ), yet all linked to the same emails. If we were to say that after 200 domains, all fraudulent, party X will most likely not be publishing an informational site with alifaxbnk.com, we would have something. Or as the case is currently and by no means unique, "UK hoster" (actually Nigerian) Agamahost.com selling domains, SSL certificates etc complete with websites to his friends back home for 419 purposes... : https://www.bdl-es.com/ibank/TLEU/tleu/jsp/uk/ing/home/index14c6.html?rf= https://www.albbplconline.com/ (hidden in there somewhere) https://www.nyfbonline.org/ https://www.fcbplcuk.com/ibank/secure/myaccount/disclaimer/asp/LogonFrame259... plus, plus, plus many more .... This requires a consolidated approach by all registrars, maybe registries even? Right now "trust" is being sold down the drain at a rapid rate. Being in IT for close to 30 year I am short of neurotic of all things registrar and internet related, 100 times more knowledgeable than the average user in things internet related. Yet even I cannot say anymore what is sometimes real and what not. What chance has the average consumer have? Yet while Rome is burning people are trying to attribute credit? My 5c worth. Derek Smythe Evan Leibovitch wrote:
I find it fascinating -- and disturbing -- that one of our longest discussion threads of recent memory is not about policy, or even process, but assigning credit.
If only we could have something even half as engaging regarding the most pressing current issue (IMO) which is proposing an alternative to the massive excesses of the IRT report. Without an alternative in hand, that piece of crap is the only approach to trademarks that ICANN senior staff and Board have in their hands.
If that doesn't interest you, please find something else that does. There are certainly enough going on right now: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=rJKtp8gl3W5-ZcY_xMpPg5w Pick a working group and get involved, wake it up if you have to.
ALAC has an acute shortage of people stepping forward to help on policy. We have an otherwise-needless Executive Committee formed merely because there are so many vacuums to fill, which means the same small core of people are being called upon to to most of the work. And then people complain about inclusiveness...
Please -- those of you who have so keenly debated who deserves the honours for past actions -- consider that we have many more such potential actions ahead. Let's not make domain tasting the ONLY policy achievement we of which should be proud.
- Evan
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org