[anti-abuse-wg] ICANN's "Money Grab"

In message <1D15A23E-6695-4770-892C-D5FF0197AC82 at blacknight.com>, 
Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com> wrote:

>I am currently the Chair of the Registrar Stakeholder Group. I was not
>Chair during the negotiations of the 2013 RAA so I was not directly
>involved in the negotiations with ICANN

Alright.  But were you a _member_ of the Registrar Stakeholder Group
during the time leading up to the finalization of the 2013 RAA, no?

You would agree, would you not, that the Registrar Stakeholder Group
did in fact negotiate against ICANN as it was attempting to finalize
the terms and conditions of the 2013 RAA?

Given the lack of response, I am forced to reiterate the key questions
from my last posting:

1)  An un-careful reading of the terms and conditions of the 2013 RAA
contract _seems_ to suggests that registrars are expected to make at
least _some_ effort to at least verify that the mailing address fields
of WHOIS records are real, and that they are not just associated with
some address on the planet Pluto.  But a careful reading of this same
section (1.e) of the 2013 RAA shows that in fact this is false, and
that any registrar can easily weasel out of this ``requirement'' by
claiming (without proof) financial hardship.

You sir, are the current head of the Registrar Stakeholder Group.
How many of the registrars who are members of your group ARE actually
checking the validity of the mailing address portion of the WHOIS
records for the domains they register?  Any?  Any at all?  Even one?

If anyone should be able to answer this question, you should.

2)  With respect to _both_ section 1.e 1nd 1.f of the 2013 RAA contract,
as I previously asked:  Why all of the pretense?  Why didn't the 2013
RAA just simply state the obvious truth, i.e. that "Registrars are only
required to make an effort to validate JUST the e-mail address" ?

Have both your group, the Registrar Stakeholder Group, and ICANN simply
tried, half-heartedly. to make it _appear_ (to casual observers) that
either one of you actually gives a damn about WHOIS accuracy, when in
fact, the opposite is closer to the truth?



Regards,
rfg