This raises the question for consumers - how are they to make an informed choice of registrar? Are there any sites that make a comparison, including suspension trigger happiness? j On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Kathy Kleiman <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > Marc, > I know everyone tries their best in these situations, but your story is > classic. I am saving it as a "must-read" for newcomers to the field. Tx, > Kathy > > > <<It's interesting that Kathy mentioned Godaddy and take down requests. I > have a personal story about what happened with Godaddy taking out an entire > data center due to a spam complaint. I was hosted at the data center and a > friend of mine owns it and he had me make the call knowing that I'm good at > getting results. The data center was called nectartech.com. > > > What happened was that some customer got hacked and was sending spam. The > customer was using nectartech.com name servers as was most of their > customers. On Friday January 13th around 5:00pm Godaddy suspended the > nectartech.com domain. And it was a 3 day weekend. What happened then was > a legendary story about how I managed to get nectartech.com back online in > spite of Godaddy's suspention. > > This is a great anecdotal story about what can happen when registrars go > wild with domain suspension. You can read about it all over the internet by > googling godaddy and nectartech. What I did was to record the phone call > with Godaddy support and post it on the Internet/ About 18 hours later, > service was restored. > > The thread starts here: > > http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=477562 > > And the recording with Godaddy is here: > > http://marc.perkel.com/audio/godaddy.mp3 > > It speaks to the problem Kathy talks about when it comes to due process. In > this case it was resolved due to some unique skills that aren't available to > most people. But if anyone needs an example of what happens when a registrar > wrongly suspends a domain, is one says it all. > > On 6/28/2010 1:33 AM, Alex Gakuru wrote: > > Carlos, > > Would you be in a position to assert our voices on this WG? > > kindly, > > Alex > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:21 PM, Kathy Kleiman <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > >> Hi Carlos and All, >> I attended the same session and had similar concerns to those of Carlos. >> On the good side, for the first time in my recollection of these >> discussions, law enforcement at least discussed and answered questions about >> the importance of due process and data protection/privacy laws. >> >> on the downside, the road to registrars (and their RAA contract changes) >> is being paved with a request for every sort of monitoring and takedown >> request. Christine Jones, the respected General Counsel of GoDaddy, >> complained bitterly about this in the Public Forum. >> >> The other downside is that, in such an important Working Group, there is >> no NCUC representative. I know there are too many things going on, and too >> many important issues, but this one is central. If you can put someone on >> the WG (which has much more work to go), then NCUC's insights, >> understandings, and concerns for due process and the limits of the scope and >> mission of ICANN will have a much stronger voice than comments alone. >> >> Best, >> Kathy >> >> >> I will be happy to try and help. >>> >>> fraternal regards >>> >>> --c.a. >>> >>> On 06/24/2010 07:28 AM, Alex Gakuru wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Wendy Seltzer<[log in to unmask]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks Carlos, >>>>> We should include you in drafting public comments on the RAA report >>>>> which >>>>> attached the law enforcement recommendations. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I second Carlos inclusion on the drafters team. >>>> >>>> >>>> I think at least some of the law enforcement representatives are >>>>> concerned >>>>> about balance, and perhaps we can acknowledge their concerns while >>>>> recommending safeguards and due process requirements to oppose many of >>>>> their >>>>> specific recommendations. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Absolutely! On our comments, please call for privacy law enforcement >>>> representatives also? >>>> >>>> kindly, >>>> >>>> Alex >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> --Wendy >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 06/24/2010 06:06 AM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I have just read the transcript of the panel "Law Enforcement >>>>>> Amendments to the RAA ", held on 21 June, 2010 during the Brussels >>>>>> ICANN >>>>>> meeting. The panel was chaired by ALAC's Cheryl Langdon-Orr. Everyone >>>>>> seemed to be sort of happy of sharing a discussion room full of police >>>>>> :) >>>>>> >>>>>> I do not understand the role law enforcers are supposed to play in >>>>>> defining ICANN policies. >>>>>> >>>>>> Law enforcers such as the FBI, Interpol etc work on a very simple >>>>>> paradigm: they follow orders, and the more information they get, the >>>>>> better to fulfill the orders they ought to follow. So they will always >>>>>> defend the idea that all private data should be recorded and made >>>>>> available to them whenever they deem necessary. It simply makes their >>>>>> job easier, and this is enough for them, and is all we will hear from >>>>>> them, whatever the nice dressing of their discourses. >>>>>> >>>>>> However, ICANN should be looking for appropriate policies which abide >>>>>> by >>>>>> internationally recognized human rights principles. This is the realm >>>>>> of >>>>>> legislators, policy-makers, regulators -- not law enforcers -- and >>>>>> these >>>>>> are the organizations ICANN should be talking to in deciding policies >>>>>> regarding balancing privacy rights with security. >>>>>> >>>>>> If decisions regarding the users' / consumers' rights to privacy are >>>>>> going to be taken on the advice of the police, I do not think we will >>>>>> arrive at a good end of this story. >>>>>> >>>>>> --c.a. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Wendy Seltzer -- [log in to unmask] >>>>> Fellow, Silicon Flatirons Center at University of Colorado Law School >>>>> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet& Society at Harvard University >>>>> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html >>>>> http://www.chillingeffects.org/ >>>>> https://www.torproject.org/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>> > > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org ---------------------------------------------------------------