Here is one very interesting paragraph on private registrations. “ICANN has obtained preliminary results of its study of domain names, registered among the top five gTLDs, which appear to have been registered using a privacy or proxy service. ICANN published preliminary findings on its website (that 15-25% of these domain name registrations used these services) and will seek validation of the study’s findings with the registrars of record for those domain names.“  Of course, some would call that an invasion of privacy. The results will make an interesting read….

Overall, the 2009 report is a goldmine of breach notices, consumer complaints, terminations and non-renewals – far too many to list here. If need some humorous bedtime reading you can download it directly.

Since April 2009 (when ICANN implemented policy to interfere with a free market), “the number of AGP deletes across all TLDs has held steady at around 55-65k names per month approximately 0.3% of what it once was”.

Beckstrom spent less than 12 months in the Department of Homeland Security, where he was the Director of the National Cybersecurity Centre. Now ICANN is plugging him as an Internet Security expert! Oh, give me a break!

I don’t believe that less than 12 months in a bureaucratic job puts you in the “expert category”, particularly when you  resign after  “after learning that orders were canceled for computers, network equipment, furniture and office space in Arlington slated for his group.”

While Beckstrom officially reported “to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Beckstrom said he has not yet had a meeting with her.” Here is his resignation letter.

Fast forward another 4 months to today, where he goes on the record saying “I do want to really understand how the IANA (Internet Assigned Names Authority contract) works, how the DNS system works.” Ummmm… this does not exactly inspire confidence! Shouldnt you know this already? But you are supposed to be an Internet security expert and you don’t know how DNS works! WTF?

Beckstrom is touting himself as this honest, straight talking guy, so lets see if he does the right thing and cancels these proposed gTLD’s. Action speaks louder than words.

September 30 will be a decisive day, as the agreement between ICANN and the US Department of Commerce will expire. The result may result in a more open and independent governance of the internet – or not.

I’d note this ICANN “Return for organisation exempt from income tax” which lists “Paul Twomey (CEO), $691,610 ($255,649 contribution to employee benefit plans)”. Like many people, I think that’s a bit too much for a not for profit. However, the theory goes, that if you want to attract the best talent, then you have to pay the big $$$. I did say theory didn’t I?

Via: VUNET

What Happened?

It was quite entertaining. See for yourself; we have preserved this historical grilling session here:

Feel free to rate the video and post comments.

Documents

Chair Boucher’s Opening Statement

Chair Waxman’s Opening Statement

Testimony of Fiona Alexander, Associate Administrator, Office of International Affairs, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce

Testimony of Paul Twomey, President and CEO, ICANN

Testimony of Kenneth J. Silva, Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer, VeriSign

Testimony of Christine N. Jones, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, The Go Daddy Group, Inc

Testimony of Sarah Deutsch, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, Verizon Communications

Testimony of Thomas M. Lenard, President and Senior Fellow, Technology Policy Institute

For more details, check out this article in Kikabink News.

The chairman also stated in a letter to ICANN, “It is “an important tangible and symbolic milestone for this nation, as well as the freedom and hopes of the Iraqi people”.

A recent survey cited by the U.S.-led administration in Iraq found that about 6% of Iraqis say they have access to the Internet but fewer than 2% use it regularly.

Source: USA Today

For those reading this, we are going to play a game. When you see the word “independent”, substitute that for the words “seriously conflicted, ICANN sponsored propaganda, marketing piece”. Ok, lets go….

ICANN allegedly commissioned these two independent reports:

• Impact of New gTLDs on Consumer Welfare
• Price Caps for New gTLD Internet Registries

Based on feedback from the whole world, ICANN allegedly went back and asked the person who wrote the reports to “supplement his work”.  At this point, lets look at part of some feedback given by the European-American Business Council who represent 65 US and European-based global companies.

ICANN should re-evaluate the current plan for new gTLDs, at least insofar as it involves the award of any new gTLDs that comprise trademarks.

In particular, ICANN should pay for a truly independent economic study of the market (instead of commissioning an economic advocacy paper designed to support its wish to rollout new TLDs).

In view of this market analysis, it could be determined whether the goal of the scheme is proportionate to the potential effects of new TLDs on consumers and business owners.

In addition, such an analysis may show that a gTLD expansion (if any) should be limited until adequate, low or no cost safeguards are in place to protect consumers, businesses, and brand owners from brand abuse, confusion and cyber fraud threats.

I’m pretty sure that I don’t have to look too deep into my crystal ball to see what’s going to happen here. It walks like a duck, quacks like a duck…. OMG, you’ll never guess what!

Maybe I’m being overly critical? What do you think?

Thanks to the original post made by Andrew Allemann that inspired me to write this.

So, what’s happened since then? My friends at Netfleet clocked up 30,000 domains, 1,500 offers and 105 transactions. Not bad when 99.9% of the population doesn’t understand the basic concept that you can buy/sell these things.

Just to put the icing on the cake; this week mortgage.net.au apparently sold for $13,500! I nearly fell off my chair when I read this – FOR A .NET.AU ? What the? Others include jeweller.com.au for $14,767 and freestuff.com.au for $18,700.

So, at least we are off to a start. It certainly wasn’t the big bang that people said it would be. Why am I not surprised? Despite being an Aussie, I personally haven’t been a fan of the .com.au namespace, but I am warming up to it….

Of course things would be better if the Australian government changed the backward, dysfunctional, judge, jury and executioner, “regulator” who is continuously in the media for all the wrong reasons, making Australia a complete joke on the world stage. Here are a few quotes from recent articles:

• Bolton dusts off for another courtroom scrap

“Cheyne Jonstone, of Cove Business Technology, has also called on Senator Conroy to sort out the mess….Senator Stephen Conroy needs to act now and act quickly. The government appointed this body to implement policy and regulate the .au domain name space, but their actions of late demonstrate that they are failing to do that adequately, or more importantly, the actions of their CEO, Chris Disspain.”

• Opinion: auDA recklessness damages Australian domain industry

“Larry Bloch, CEO and co-founder of Netregistry says Chris Disspain of auDA has acted as judge, jury and executioner by cancelling Bottle Domains’ accreditation so suddenly, here he talks to CRN about how this action is now proving to be grossly negligent.”

• Bottle Domains settlement talk scuttled as damages loom

“auDA chief Chris Disspain gave iTnews a categoric “no” when asked if the regulator would consider settling the case before it goes to trial on 24th June….. He also said the regulator had a strong enough cash position – some $4.3 million in reserves – to back up a further unfavourable ruling from the Victorian Supreme Court.”

Should auDA exist in its current form? Should there be protests at ICANN’s 35th meeting in Sydney this month, calling for the Australian government to step in, use their reserve powers in relation to domain names (under the Telecommunications Act 1997) and remove auDA? Perhaps transfer it to ACMA or another body, with more experience, that’s truly representative of the industry.

Post and let me know what you think.