At 5/12/04 8:23 AM, James M Woods wrote: >The new rules were set to be released at the end of March (with the >understanding that registrars would have 90 days to implement) , but >ICANN has delayed the release of the new rules for reasons unknown. We >are eagerly awaiting for a new release date but have no line of sight >as to when this might be. > >The last note from ICANN regarding this topic can be found here : >http://www.icann.org/transfers/index.html
What a delightful letter from the honest folks at Network Solutions, who have only the registrant's interests at heart. In particular, this paragraph demonstrates their sincerity: >Let us be candid. The changes ICANN has adopted were aimed at breaking a >monopoly that no longer exists. I will not argue that the transfer policy >was abused at that time. However, the abuse today is coming from >fraudulent transfers, not from denials of transfers. Well, yes, let us be candid. For example, let's look at the sentence "I will not argue that the transfer policy was abused at that time." This sounds an awful lot like "mistakes were made", as if someone else had abused the transfer policy -- but as it turns out, NSI was, and is, one of the biggest violators. Let's all recall how Verisign once sent notices resembling invoices to WHOIS contacts, just like Domain Registry of America: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2003/09/networksolutions.htm Just so it's perfectly clear, the deceptive practices that NSI is asking ICANN to protect them from are THE SAME DECEPTIVE PRACTICES THE FTC SAYS NSI USED THEMSELVES when it was to their advantage. This fact alone should eliminate their claim from being taken seriously. That's just the best-documented example, of course; NSI has demonstrated plenty of other deceptive and misleading practices with regard to denying transfers that I know for a fact have been approved by the WHOIS admin contact. And they're still doing it: they don't provide AUTH codes for EPP transfers unless you call them, and then they won't send them to anyone but the private contact e-mail address that doesn't appear in WHOIS (the admin contact can't get them). Even an RRP transfer requires approval by both the admin contact (on the gaining side) AND the invisible private contact (on the losing side), which is apparently being done for no reason other than make it harder to approve legitimate transfers -- it means that the gaining registrar has no idea where the NSI approval messages are going, so you can't really help people who want to transfer and don't get the messages. Perhaps their next sentence is more honest: "However, the abuse today is coming from fraudulent transfers, not from denials of transfers." Nope, guess not: that's a sack of utter crap. Denials of transfers are a far bigger problem than fraudulent transfers -- and almost the entire fraudulent transfer problem is now coming from Domain Registry of America, who can be trivially stopped if anyone at ICANN actually wishes to do anything about it. To say this delay is discouraging is an understatement. -- Robert L Mathews, Tiger Technologies http://www.tigertech.net/ "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." -- Darwin
