Registrar behaviour
Hi all I have a strange question. We all know that the registrar EstDomains is no more based upon certain aspects that were revealed relating to it's director's past. Of course this was in line with the behavioral requirements to become and stay a registrar. Now what if a registrar is in a country where cybercrime is a non issue and the registrar is actively being abused or maybe even abusing his position for cybercrime; scam websites, botnets, spamming and CP etc - in fact every form of deviant net behavior not only frowned upon, but would make the reason EstDomains was suspended look like a walk in the park, with many of the acts being advertised as okay. Domains are set up such as to frustrate law enforcement and lawyers. How to handle this situation if this situation is being exploited to actively attract the money and business of international cyber criminals who in turn prey upon innocent netizens and central to this is domains? Then to crown it all, ICANN is being used to give the registrar credibility on the same pages attracting cyber criminals! Derek
Not a strange question at all. In my view, the answer is simple. The Registrars Accreditation Agreement allows withdrawal of an ICANN accreditation for many reasons. At times ICANN has used an easy-to-prove rationale for withdrawal. This is the same as in some countries, leaders of organized crime might be jailed for tax evasion. This might not be the worst of their crimes, but the easiest one to prove in a court. Similarly, in cases such as you mention, ICANN might have to use the harder-to-prove provisions in its contracts. Alan At 03/10/2009 08:32 PM, Derek Smythe wrote:
Hi all
I have a strange question.
We all know that the registrar EstDomains is no more based upon certain aspects that were revealed relating to it's director's past.
Of course this was in line with the behavioral requirements to become and stay a registrar.
Now what if a registrar is in a country where cybercrime is a non issue and the registrar is actively being abused or maybe even abusing his position for cybercrime; scam websites, botnets, spamming and CP etc - in fact every form of deviant net behavior not only frowned upon, but would make the reason EstDomains was suspended look like a walk in the park, with many of the acts being advertised as okay.
Domains are set up such as to frustrate law enforcement and lawyers.
How to handle this situation if this situation is being exploited to actively attract the money and business of international cyber criminals who in turn prey upon innocent netizens and central to this is domains? Then to crown it all, ICANN is being used to give the registrar credibility on the same pages attracting cyber criminals!
Derek
_______________________________________________ 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
Similarly, in cases such as you mention, ICANN might have to use the harder-to-prove provisions in its contracts.
I read the question somewhat differently -- would ICANN have any interest in turning off registrars who are paying their bills? I'm aware of at least one registrar (Dynamic Dolphin) whose owner has a felony conviction for receiving stolen property, but ICANN appears not to care. R's, John
Hi all
I have a strange question.
We all know that the registrar EstDomains is no more based upon certain aspects that were revealed relating to it's director's past.
Of course this was in line with the behavioral requirements to become and stay a registrar.
Now what if a registrar is in a country where cybercrime is a non issue and the registrar is actively being abused or maybe even abusing his position for cybercrime; scam websites, botnets, spamming and CP etc - in fact every form of deviant net behavior not only frowned upon, but would make the reason EstDomains was suspended look like a walk in the park, with many of the acts being advertised as okay.
Domains are set up such as to frustrate law enforcement and lawyers.
How to handle this situation if this situation is being exploited to actively attract the money and business of international cyber criminals who in turn prey upon innocent netizens and central to this is domains? Then to crown it all, ICANN is being used to give the registrar credibility on the same pages attracting cyber criminals!
ICANN is not the International justice system, or then there is clearly mission creep... Does the registrar follow the contract and ICANN rules? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Sunday, 4 October, 2009 4:54:13 PM GMT +12:00 Fiji Subject: Re: [At-Large] Registrar behaviour
Similarly, in cases such as you mention, ICANN might have to use the harder-to-prove provisions in its contracts.
I read the question somewhat differently -- would ICANN have any interest in turning off registrars who are paying their bills? I'm aware of at least one registrar (Dynamic Dolphin) whose owner has a felony conviction for receiving stolen property, but ICANN appears not to care. R's, John
ICANN is not the International justice system, or then there is clearly mission creep...
Does the registrar follow the contract and ICANN rules?
Please read section 5.3.2 of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement, and then tell us whether I'm asking about mission creep, or about ICANN enforcing its own rules. It might also be useful to remember that ICANN is incorporated as a tax-exempt charity (something that will not change under the new agreement), which means it is supposed to work for the public benefit. What is the public benefit in enabling criminals to be registrars? R's, John
----- Original Message ----- From: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Sunday, 4 October, 2009 4:54:13 PM GMT +12:00 Fiji Subject: Re: [At-Large] Registrar behaviour
Similarly, in cases such as you mention, ICANN might have to use the harder-to-prove provisions in its contracts.
I read the question somewhat differently -- would ICANN have any interest in turning off registrars who are paying their bills? I'm aware of at least one registrar (Dynamic Dolphin) whose owner has a felony conviction for receiving stolen property, but ICANN appears not to care.
On 10/04/2009 06:22 AM, John R. Levine wrote:
It might also be useful to remember that ICANN is incorporated as a tax-exempt charity (something that will not change under the new agreement), which means it is supposed to work for the public benefit.
More detail on this: ICANN has legal existence as a California "public-benefit" corporation. That is one form among several forms of non-profit corporation that under California's corporations laws. One of the reasons ICANN is extremely allergic to the word "election" comes from the action of that code - see my note on this at http://www.cavebear.com/archive/icann-board/platform.htm#full-members We can expect this allergy to come up in the context of the way in which the public (at-large community) director is chosen. We can expect ICANN's law firm, which is even more allergic to "elections" than is ICANN, to fight tooth and nail against any system in which the word "election" is used, particularly if that system of choosing is defined into ICANN's articles or bylaws. ICANN has a separate and distinct status in which it obtains what is called a 501(c)(3) exemption from US taxation (and is burdened with certain restrictions on its activities). ICANN obtained that exemption on the grounds that ICANN "lessens the burdens of government". Notice that that reason has nothing to do with whether ICANN does good for the net or the community of internet users as long as ICANN makes life easier for the US government. The California status has an interesting aspect - unlike for-profit corporation in which Directors are required to make choices in the best interest of the corporation, Directors of public-benefit corporations such as ICANN are required to expand the concept of what is in the best interest of the corporation to include the beneficial or harmful effect to the public interest of the proposed choice. This stuff can get complicated. --karl--
Karl Auerbach wrote:
This stuff can get complicated.
And it may get more complicated. It would not surprise me at all if one of the acts of the new post-JPA ICANN is to move its incorporation outside of the US, to an environment less litigation happy and more in line with the its status as an international co-ordination body. - Evan
John, We all know that ICANN has to have a gun to its head to take any action against any registrar. We know from their own documents that ICANN took no action, except writing letters, against Network Solutions when it had domain names registered with an address of 123 Yellow Brick Road, Oz, Kansas. We know that many registrars provide private registrations to spammers. One registrar had been sued for providing this service to a spammer. Now Tucows is being sued for providing this service to a registrar. ICANN has been aware of both registrars providing this service to spammers, but did nothing. I know of an attorney who is considering suing ICANN for either the refusal or inability to take action.
Similarly, in cases such as you mention, ICANN might have to use the harder-to-prove provisions in its contracts.
I read the question somewhat differently -- would ICANN have any interest in turning off registrars who are paying their bills? I'm aware of at least one registrar (Dynamic Dolphin) whose owner has a felony conviction for receiving stolen property, but ICANN appears not to care.
R's, John
Hi all
I have a strange question.
We all know that the registrar EstDomains is no more based upon certain aspects that were revealed relating to it's director's past.
Of course this was in line with the behavioral requirements to become and stay a registrar.
Now what if a registrar is in a country where cybercrime is a non issue and the registrar is actively being abused or maybe even abusing his position for cybercrime; scam websites, botnets, spamming and CP etc - in fact every form of deviant net behavior not only frowned upon, but would make the reason EstDomains was suspended look like a walk in the park, with many of the acts being advertised as okay.
Domains are set up such as to frustrate law enforcement and lawyers.
How to handle this situation if this situation is being exploited to actively attract the money and business of international cyber criminals who in turn prey upon innocent netizens and central to this is domains? Then to crown it all, ICANN is being used to give the registrar credibility on the same pages attracting cyber criminals!
_______________________________________________ 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
On 4 Oct 2009, at 05:54, John R. Levine wrote:
Similarly, in cases such as you mention, ICANN might have to use the harder-to-prove provisions in its contracts.
I read the question somewhat differently -- would ICANN have any interest in turning off registrars who are paying their bills? I'm aware of at least one registrar (Dynamic Dolphin) whose owner has a felony conviction for receiving stolen property, but ICANN appears not to care.
How is that relevant to their ability to provide services in line with the RAA?? Jaywalking is against the law .. I've done it. Want to revoke my RAA? :) Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://mneylon.tel Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 UK: 0844 484 9361 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
I'm aware of at least one registrar (Dynamic Dolphin) whose owner has a felony conviction for receiving stolen property, but ICANN appears not to care.
How is that relevant to their ability to provide services in line with the RAA??
We're not talking jaywalking here. As I recall, the crime at issue involved attempts to resell stolen construction equipment. Is that really someone you want as the custodian of your registrant information? R's, John
On 5 Oct 2009, at 16:07, John R. Levine wrote:
I'm aware of at least one registrar (Dynamic Dolphin) whose owner has a felony conviction for receiving stolen property, but ICANN appears not to care.
How is that relevant to their ability to provide services in line with the RAA??
We're not talking jaywalking here. As I recall, the crime at issue involved attempts to resell stolen construction equipment. Is that really someone you want as the custodian of your registrant information?
John I think you've semi-missed my point. A "serious crime" is one thing, but I'd be very wary of people lumping all crimes in together Michele
Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://mneylon.tel Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 UK: 0844 484 9361 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
participants (8)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Bill Silverstein -
Derek Smythe -
Evan Leibovitch -
Franck Martin -
John R. Levine -
Karl Auerbach -
Michele Neylon :: Blacknight