Sergey Sharikov (Regtime.net/WebNames.ru) Alternate root ".ком" sellers on ICANN WG

[555]

This explains the person that is until now offering 'names' that can't resolve, can't be indexed etc, is going to take part in the experts panel regarding Cyrillic domains within the IDN VIP (VariantsIssuesProject) Working group.

http://dkvartal.ru/news/185758244

[Explorer]

I wonder about his opinion regarding .ком offered by Verisign...Can ICANN spell the phrase "conflict of interest"?

[Rubber Duck]

I wonder about his opinion regarding .ком offered by Verisign...Can ICANN spell the phrase "conflict of interest"?

Perhaps this is deliberate to deflect similar criticism relating to Verisign?

[dave_5]

Sergey Sharikov is the buddy of Keren from domain the net in Israel. They also going to ask for the transliteration of "com" in Hebrew.

Why verisign is not even saying something?

Do these guys think they have a chance getting the transliteration? why spend 250k?

[DktoInc]

something very fishy has been going on for a while.

[555]

Cyrillic Case Study
Alexey Sozonov (Coordinator)
Alexei Mykhaylov
Alexey Ptashniy
Daniel Kalchev
Iliya Bazlyankov
Oksana Prykhodko
Saso Dimitrijoski
Sergey Sharikov
Vladimir Shadrunov

The joint ccNSO-GNSO Working Group on IDNs (JIG) will appoint an observer for each case study.

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-3-09jun11-en.htm

[Drewbert]

Is it proper for an ICANN accredited registrar to sell "alternative root" domains from their homepage, listed alongside real TLD's?

INCLUDING .ру which has been deemed by ICANN as too confusingly similar to .py to EVER exist in the ICANN root?

Maybe one of the IDN Blogs should ask that in an open letter to ICANN?

[Drewbert]

http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/policy_statement.html



M. Termination of Agreement. The accreditation agreement may be terminated by ICANN before its expiration in any of the following circumstances:

5. The registrar acts in a manner that ICANN reasonably determines endangers the stability and operational integrity of the Internet.



Selling confusingly similar .ру domains outside the ICANN root system would be deemed to fit inside clause 5, I feel.

[Drewbert]

And from the current Registrar Agreement...

http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/ra-agreement-21may09-en.htm


5.3 Termination of Agreement by ICANN. This Agreement may be terminated before its expiration by ICANN in any of the following circumstances:

5.3.6 Registrar continues acting in a manner that ICANN has reasonably determined endangers the stability or operational integrity of the Internet after receiving three (3) days notice of that determination.

[squirrel]

Does ICANN even know about this ? don't think so

[Drewbert]

And the final nail in the coffin...

http://www.icann.org/en/icp/icp-3.htm


Frequently, however, these alternate roots have been established to support top-level or pseudo-top-level domain name registries that are operated for profit. Yet other alternate roots have been established by certain individuals to protest the policies developed by the broader community processes for management of the authoritative root, or to express their disinterest in participating in those processes. These alternate roots have not been launched through any ICANN consensus processes, so they have not been entered into the authoritative root managed by the IANA or ICANN.

These alternate roots typically substitute insular concerns in place of the community-based processes that govern the management of the authoritative root. Their operators decide to include particular top-level domains in these alternate roots that have not been subjected to the tests of community support and conformance with consensus processes – coordinated by ICANN – that would allow their inclusion in the authoritative root. These decisions of the alternate-root operators have been made without any apparent regard for the fundamental public-interest concern of Internet stability. The widespread use of active domain names in these alternate roots could in fact impair the uniqueness of the authoritative name-resolution mechanism and hence the stability of the DNS.

ICANN's mandate to preserve stability of the DNS requires that it avoid encouraging the proliferation of these alternate roots that could cause conflicts and instability. This means that ICANN continues to adhere to community-based processes in its decisions regarding the content of the authoritative root. Within its current policy framework, ICANN can give no preference to those who choose to work outside of these processes and outside of the policies engendered by this public trust.


and...


Some of these operators and their supporters assert that their very presence in the marketplace gives them preferential right to TLDs to be authorized in the future by ICANN. They work under the philosophy that if they get there first with something that looks like a TLD and invite many registrants to participate, then ICANN will be required by their very presence and force of numbers to recognize in perpetuity these pseudo TLDs, inhibiting new TLDs with the same top-level name from being launched through the community's processes.

No current policy would allow ICANN to grant such preferential rights. To do so would effectively yield ICANN's mandate to introduce new TLDs in an orderly manner in the public interest to those who would simply grab all the TLD names that seem to have any marketplace value, thus circumventing the community-based processes that ICANN is required to follow. For ICANN to yield its mandate would be a violation of the public trust under which ICANN was created and under which it must operate. Were it to grant such preferential rights, ICANN would abandon this public trust, rooted in the community, to those who only act for their own benefit. Indeed, granting preferential rights could jeopardize the stability of the DNS, violating ICANN's fundamental mandate.


Awkward.

[Kent99]

A site like this could cause confusion:

www.unifiedroot.com

I see this company was previously mentioned by Avtal here:

http://www.idnforums.com/forums/26958-windofchange@domenforum.html

[555]

The joint ccNSO-GNSO Working Group on IDNs (JIG) will appoint an observer for each case study.


I thought it might make sense to nominate myself to be the observer/liaison
among the groups so we can keep an overall view of the discussions. I
understand that some of the members in this group are already team members in
some of the study teams as well.



And personally, I have not entered any of the teams as a team member so that it
would work better to me to act as an overall observer. Anyway, if you have any
other ideas, feel free to suggest.



Edmon


http://forum.icann.org/lists/jig/msg00251.html

[555]

Is it proper for an ICANN accredited registrar to sell "alternative root" domains from their homepage, listed alongside real TLD's?

INCLUDING .ру which has been deemed by ICANN as too confusingly similar to .py to EVER exist in the ICANN root?

Maybe one of the IDN Blogs should ask that in an open letter to ICANN?

And in addition to your above posts, the first paragraph from the ICANN Bylaws:

ARTICLE I: MISSION AND CORE VALUES

Section 1. MISSION

The mission of The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ("ICANN") is to coordinate, at the overall level, the global Internet's systems of unique identifiers, and in particular to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems. In particular, ICANN:

____________

Nothing stable with having the official ICANN seal on the same page with imaginary 'domains'

[555]

I wonder about his opinion regarding .ком offered by Verisign...Can ICANN spell the phrase "conflict of interest"?
Looks as if each of the participants in the language wg's likely had to fill one of these, including but not limited to the below question:

Describe any tangible or intangible benefit that you receive from participation in such
processes, for example, if you are an academic or NGO and use your position to
advance your ability to participate, this should be a part of the statement of interest,
just as should employment by an organization that has an interest in IDN Variant
Working Group outcomes

e.g https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/18120874/SOI+Andrzej+Bartosiewicz.pdf

[Explorer]

Looks as if each of the participants in the language wg's likely had to fill one of these, including but not limited to the below question:

Describe any tangible or intangible benefit that you receive from participation in such
processes, for example, if you are an academic or NGO and use your position to
advance your ability to participate, this should be a part of the statement of interest,
just as should employment by an organization that has an interest in IDN Variant
Working Group outcomes

e.g https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/18120874/SOI+Andrzej+Bartosiewicz.pdf

I wonder how he filled in this part:

"Are you representing other parties? Describe any arrangements/agreements between you and any other group, constituency or person(s) regarding your nomination/selection as a work team member"