INEGroups response to UDRP and DNRC's protest

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

To all concerned,

We at INEGroup also endorse the complaint that the DNRC has
filed with ICANN and would also like to include our endorsement
to the DOC/NTIA as well as the House Commerce Commission.

  The ICANN UDRP policy was not determined in accordance
with the White Paper nor the MoU which the ICANN is supposed to
adhere to.  As such we find that the ICANN Board has acted improperly
and without consideration of ALL of the stakeholders consideration
in a a "Bottom-up" approach which the White Paper and the MoU
as well as the ICANN's own bylaws require.  Our 98,000 members
are all stakeholders and are unanimously opposed to the ICANN's
UDRP determination.  In that light we feel justified in saying that
the ICANN board could not have acted in the best interests of
the stakeholders.

Jay Fenello wrote:

> DNRC Files Complaint with ICANN over Uniform Dispute Policy
>
> HERNDON, October 7 /PRNewswire/ -- The Domain Name Rights Coalition
> (DNRC), an organization dedicated to protecting the interests of
> entrepreneurs, small business owners and individuals in domain name
> issues, today filed a formal complaint with ICANN on their proposed
> Uniform Dispute Policy (UDP).
>
> "We object to any uniform dispute policy, especially one that skews
> the playing field towards large trademark holders" said Mikki Barry,
> president of the DNRC.  "Under this proposal, only the domain name
> holders are contractually obligated to follow the rules, while
> trademark holders continue to have their traditional options
available.
> This not only inhibits competition, but it gives special rights to
> trademark holders that do not exist in any other medium."
>
> The DNRC also protested the use of a small drafting committee, and
> the way that suggestions were filtered through an ICANN attorney.  It
> was yet another example of ICANN circumventing the White Paper's call
> for bottom-up, consensus processes.
>
> In addition, the DNRC noted how the UDP goes well beyond the mandate
> of curtailing cybersquatting and reverse domain name hijacking.
Reverse
> domain name hijacking is hardly mentioned in either the rules or the
UDP,
> and most of the other provisions go well beyond the stated purpose of
> the UDP.
>
> These objections join a long list of other complaints against ICANN,
> including the expansion of their mandate from "technical management"
to
> policy issues that will likely impact civil liberties world-wide,
ICANN
> ignoring its own rules and by-laws, and ICANN's refusal to give
> individuals any say at the ICANN table.
>
> The Domain Name Rights Coalition was formed in 1996, and has worked
> for national and international policies which are fair and equitable
> to all users of the Internet ever since.  It has also worked to
protect
> the Internet as a global medium of communication and free speech, and
> it is well known for its vigilant fight against the Domain Name
Dispute
> Policy of Network Solutions, Inc. and similar policies recommended by
> the World Intellectual Property Organization.
>
> CONTACT:  Mikki Barry
>            www.domain-name.org
>            703-925-0282
>
> SOURCE:   Fenello.com, Inc.
>            www.fenello.com
>            770-392-9480

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208