[gnso-rpm-wg] RPM Group <> Re: DomainNameWire ~ CentralNic to nuke a handful of pseudo-domain names

Sat May 7 14:05:58 UTC 2016

Hi Gentlemen & RPM Group:     Cc Garth:

Further to the conversation in the RPM Meeting of May 4th, thank you Phil
for the engaging in / expanding the dialog on *CentralNic*; and their
ability to be exempt from ICANN’s RAA Rules.

I’d like to thank George Kirikos for his statement to Phil:

*“I think Graham is talking about 3rd level dot-com domains (not ccTLDs).
i.e. Landcruise .uk.com <http://landcruise.uk.com/>, vs. Landcruise.com”.*

Yes George, I am indeed curious how:  *“That "special rule" by CentralNic
is not something blessed by or authorized by ICANN.”  *became such an
accepted racket by ICANN; and why ICANN’s Contractual Compliance never
shut-them-down?

Thanks also to Greg, our ICANN IPC President for this link from:

*“ADR Forum's website: CentralNic is a second level domain registrant that
sells third-level domains to users. *

*Registration of a third level domain name in one of CentralNic’s second
level domains requires agreement to CentralNic’s Dispute Resolution Policy.
Prior to filing a CDRP, the complainant is required to attempt mediation by
contacting CentralNic.*

*The CDRP process is almost identical to the UDRP.
http://www.adrforum.com/ThirdLevel <http://www.adrforum.com/ThirdLevel>”*

To all RPM Members:   Why must a .COM Domain Name Registrant mediate with
their Contributory Infringer, another RAA Subject, Domain Name Registrant?
  Ask yourselves reflectively, these questions of ~ *Third-Level Domain
Names: at the ADR Forum. *http://www.adrforum.com/ThirdLevel

*[ WHY ? ]  *Ordinarily, domain name dispute resolution policies do not
apply to third-level domain names.

A few second-level domain name registrants have decided to *[ e~VaED the
ACPA ]* sell third-level domain names like a Registry* [ and allowed to
place those accounts into / under the VeriSign, ICANN & NTIA’s  Root Zone
of .COM in the DNS! ] * and have established dispute resolution policies to
deal with any resulting disputes. *[ which equates to Racketeering ! ]*

WHOIS History shows:   CentralNic’s uk.COM is a former; and long standing
Domain Name Registrant of Network Solutions, under the ICANN & VeriSign
“accredited” status .COM R[r]egistry / R[r]egistrar, subject to the RAA.

This was prior to their Cyber-Flight to CentralNic’s own TLD Registrar
Solutions, domiciled at CentralNic’s London address, and yet again prior
before their Third [3rd] Cyber-flight to Demys, yet again, another  ICANN &
VeriSign “accredited” .COM R[r]egistry / R[r]egistrar, where all are
subjects to the RAA.

Many of these observations or questions have been identified by another
ICANN'er, Garth Bruen [Cc'd] in his book: *“**WHOIS Running the Internet:
Protocol, Policy, and Privacy”*   where reads will see that Garth
eloquently dissects the problem.
https://books.google.ca/books?id=mgmeCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA72&dq=centralnic+schreiber&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=centralnic%20schreiber&f=false

Greg and Phil, let me be candid with you both.    Now that You’re being *FUNDED
BY* revenues in large measure by ICANN’s .COM Domain Name Registrants to go
Globe-trotting, I vigorously encourage you to stop being the batmen [
soldier-servants] to CentralNic’s *“handful of pseudo-domain names”* [Quote
from Domain Name Wire] and serve the needs of the .COM Registrant’s.
 Also, Philip Corwin, thanks for acknowledging Greg:* “Thanks for that
link, Greg”* .

Greg & Phil, I expect you both to take you’re ~ funded ~ leadership role’s
seriously; and press ICANN to enforce the RAA on CentralNic.

Further, I expect you both to deploy you’re given powers within ICANN; and
to successfully petition the United States Justice Department to ask ICANN
Et Al to answer the “Questions Presented” in SCOTUS 14-1480, as linked.
https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-cwg-naming-transition-01dec14/pdfFTOIefnB82.pdf

Should you opt not to help enforce the ACPA law, I will consider that as
Collaboration with CentralNic, going forward.

To the Members of this RPM Group, who are aware of this scam, it’s time to
stop harbouring this racketeering scheme; and oblige ICANN to enforce the
RAA on CentralNic; and also to recognize beyond ICANN, that the cc.COMs are
"*misleading"* and are a violation of established International
Intellectual Property Treaties like WTO’s TRIPS.

In closing, thanks again George for you’re help!   Given you’re
article Loopholes
and Ambiguities in Contracts that ICANN Oversees
<http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130109_loopholes_and_ambiguities_in_contracts_that_icann_oversees/>
  Jan 10, 2013 12:06 AM PDT,    I’d appreciate having you share more of
you’re knowledge & questions with the Group.
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130109_loopholes_and_ambiguities_in_contracts_that_icann_oversees/

Thanks all, for reading this and engaging ICANN Et Al, to ensure that .COM
Registrants ~ Rights Protections ~ are protected.

Regards,

Graham Schreiber.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20160507/18350f49/attachment.html>