My response interspersed below...
Danny Younger wrote:
Jeff,Indeed. But you know as well as I do that Front RunningThe article provided for your reference pointed to
continued issues with regard to transfers.
Front-running is a separate matter, which contrary to
your claims has not been discontinued. For reference
please see this article posted just two days ago --
http://blogs.computerworld.com/forward/7217/email_ref
Did so. Thanks.You may also choose to refer to the extensive
commentary on the topic at Slashdot posted yesterday
-- see
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/15/2121200
Yes. And the conclusion of this case will be interesting.and for another twist on NetSol matters, look at
http://www.entlawdigest.com/(S(renb53v3amsve145v0aa4r55))/LawReport/ViewReport.aspx?Report=27&Category=3&Area=35which states: "A federal class action claims Network
Solutions makes its customers’ private email messages
publicly available on the Internet through common
search engines such as Google, in violation of state
and federal laws."
Personally I believe Google's web site should be taken
down until or unless they fully respect individuals privacy.
But of course that will never happen....
Yes. This is both odd, and perhaps contrived. It appearsWhile the entire world it seems is talking about
NetSol's abusive practices (including the ICANN Board
-- see
http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-23jan08.htm),
the ALAC, in its role as the "voice of the individual
Internet users" has absolutely nothing to say on the
topic...
Sadly, you have a good point. >:( But of course such ano policy recommendations, no request for an issues
report, no request for a PDP, no request to ICANN
Staff for feedback as to whether NetSol practices
constitute a violation of the RAA -- instead, the ALAC
appears to be either totally clueless or horribly
irresponsible -- but what can you really expect from a
bunch of people that are just pretending to be the
at-large so that they can continue to milk the ICANN
cash cow? If they really were the at-large, we would
have heard their outrage about these situations...
instead all we hear are their ongoing requests for
even more money while registrants receive no
assistance whatsoever from their "Voice" within ICANN.
Regards,
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders 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@ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827
--- "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
wrote:> Danny and all my friends,
>
> It is clear that NSOL is, or was involved in Front
> Running
> seemingly to thwart Domain Name Tasting. However as
> we know, this was admitted on the GA list by a NSOL
> employee. However after some public exposier by
> several GA members expressing a strong desire for
> NSOL to discontnue this practice for obvious good
> reasons, NSOL subsequently for the time being,
> discontinued
> this errant and disgusting practice.
>