I'm surprised this didn't also mention their mail fraud advertising
strategy. I remember getting an obfuscated 'Domain Name Expiration
Notice,' where they ask for 'renewal' which ultimately ends up in you
unknowingly transferring your domain to them. I knew it was a scam but I
wonder how many people didn't.
Here's an example of the letter
http://www.proper.com/ICANN-notes/VeriSign-deception.html
The only 'sweet deal' Verisign deserves is a fine and some time behind
bars given their track record.
-Mike
Steve Phariss wrote:
> I just learned that ICANN and verisign have penned a deal giving verisign
> a sweetheart deal for .com registrations. This deal is still subject to
> the Commerce department approval. Here is the letter I sent (hard copy and
> via the online forms) to my representatives:
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
>
> Dear __________:
>
> I am amazed and disheartened about the recently approved .COM registry
> agreement and settlement between ICANN and VeriSign. This agreement is
> anti-competitive and bad for consumers, small business, and the Internet
> community as a whole.
>
> The agreement provides VeriSign with the ability to increase prices by 7%
> annually in four of the next six years without cost justification.
> Furthermore, under the agreement, VeriSign's monopoly would run in
> perpetuity as the agreement would automatically renew without the
> opportunity for competitive bidding. VeriSign and ICANN should not be
> allowed to establish a perpetual monopoly without Congressional oversight
> and the opportunity for input from the Internet community.
>
> Verisign has also, in the past, proven that they do not care about the
> well being of the internet. In September of 2003, verisign "commandeered"
> all misspelled and non-existant URL's. See this link to the original
> advisory. http://www.icann.org/announcements/advisory-19sep03.htm
>
> Verisign was forced to back down, however they have made several attempts
> to reintroduce this "service". My question is simple, should a monopoly
> be allowed to be granted to a company with a proven track record of
> disdain for the industry they purport to represent?
>
> As your constituent, I want to make you aware that the ICANN Board has
> approved this anti-competitive agreement on February 28th, 2006. The next
> step is for the NTIA to approve the deal. I urge you to bring our concerns
> to the attention of the NTIA.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> --
> Benjamin Franklin once wrote, "Those who would give up essential Liberties
> for a measure of Security, deserve neither Liberty nor Security!"
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)