Is it possible for Encirca to sue Richard Henderson? - DNForum - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars

**izopod** · 03-21-2005, 04:48 PM

I would if I were Encirca. He seems to be posting inflammatory language all over the place. Given the fact that he is on an advisory board that does make recommendations to ICANN... is it possible he could be sued for libel given the fact he is creating an atomosphere that is harmful to Encirca? Encirca has no relief, other than the courts in my estimation. Richard is cc'ing ICANN board members, Vint Cerf, et al so there is definitely communication that is harmful to Encirca even before they have a chance to prove their methods as useful and worthy to internet users. Keep in mind, ICANN approved the 3rd level string for dot pro..When the 2nd level string was opened up it did open the way for Encirca to create a new service which in my opinion is useful. No doctor is going to register, www.bible.pro for his business, nor would a lawyer want to buy, www.boxing.pro. It's kind of like dot us. When ICANN opened that space, there wasn't apparently any harm done to schools or government agencies.

To protect the 3rd string dot pro namespace they added strong language in that a 2nd level string dot pro name owner could not use the name to misrepsent themselves as a doctor, etc.

note who Richard is cc'ing in his "memo's": http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/.../msg02437.html It's one thing to discuss "ICANN" related stuff in open, which is usually generic, and not dealing with anyone specific ICANN registrar, but when you have this type of inflammatory communicae being aired in the open without due process, the registrar is harmed in my opinion as they have no way to rebut such as you would be able to do in an ICANN board meeting. Richard has definitely gone out of his way to harm Encirca in my humble opinion.

**Steen** · 03-21-2005, 07:18 PM

I am not in the know in regard to this situation but I can say that I personally do not think Encirca practices good business ethics.

**clemzonguy** · 03-21-2005, 08:23 PM

Sounds to me like you bought some .PRO domains?

**sharename** · 03-21-2005, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steen

I am not in the know in regard to this situation but I can say that I personally do not think Encirca practices good business ethics.

Dear Steen,

Interesting comment from a 16 year old. Why do you say this?

By the way, here's an early happy 17th birthday to you (April 8).

Sharename.

**seeker** · 03-22-2005, 07:33 AM

If I was Encirca, I would definately take legal action.
In fact, if Encirca does not take legal action, they will look more and more suspicious.
I do think their reputation has been damaged and is being damaged by Mr. Henderson.

**dtobias** · 03-28-2005, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seeker

If I was Encirca, I would definately take legal action.
In fact, if Encirca does not take legal action, they will look more and more suspicious.
I do think their reputation has been damaged and is being damaged by Mr. Henderson.

Is there anything that Mr. Henderson said that is false? As far as I am aware, everything in those reports is either true facts or constitutionally-protected statements of opinion. If Encirca tries to sue, then depending on what state they do it in, they could get hit with a countersuit under SLAPP laws, designed to stop companies from abusing the legal process to suppress free speech.

And speaking of abuse, Encirca certainly seems to be abusing the .pro domain by turning it into a de-facto free-for-all, similarly to how Network Solutions abused .com / .net / .org a decade ago by stopping their enforcement of the specific registration purpose of each of them (leading to the domain name battles since). The rules and contract provisions for the new TLDs were designed to be much more detailed and specific than the original ones for the old TLDs, specifically to prevent such abuse from developing again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharename

Interesting comment from a 16 year old. Why do you say this?

What relevance does somebody's age have to the validity of their opinion?

**diverge** · 03-28-2005, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharename

Dear Steen,

Interesting comment from a 16 year old. Why do you say this?

By the way, here's an early happy 17th birthday to you (April 8).

Sharename.

Interesting post coming from someone with 14 posts on this forum directed at someone with 4,429 posts (and counting).

**DomeBase** · 03-28-2005, 01:08 PM

person A gets mad at person B for posting "inflammatory" information on the internet about company C

so person A posts a thread on the internet titled -- "Can Company C Sue Person B?"

Is it just me or is that a pretty inflammatory title?

**Poker** · 03-28-2005, 01:48 PM

Hey, it's America, if they can sue they will, no need to get all wound up in it...

**zouzas** · 03-28-2005, 02:03 PM

anyone can sue anyone ,,whether they win is a differnet question,,,but looks like encira is starting to fight back sending a cease and dis order www.icann.blog.us
maybe they should send one to richards instead im not sure what the problem with www.icann.blog.us is

**Steen** · 03-28-2005, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLe8

Interesting post coming from someone with 14 posts on this forum directed at someone with 4,429 posts (and counting).

Now, now, post count doesn't mean anything

I thought I addressed this quite well, then the forum experienced data loss

**lionheart** · 03-28-2005, 05:03 PM

I think the outcome of this .pro business will be down to ICANN. My suspicion is that they will choose to let sleeping dogs lie and then, maybe 12 to 18 months downstream they may compromise and the second level domains will be allowed to operate pretty normally, maybe under the guise of the "leasehold" scheme but maybe not (because as some people have suggested, when a genie gets out of the bottle, what do you do about it?). Historically, ICANN have been extremely non-interventionist with their registries and accredited registrars. According to Dan Halloran some time back, they chose to operate a "laissez faire" policy and that has certainly been my experience.

So my number 1 bet would be that they will let this .pro initiative of EnCirca's (and RegistryPro's?) go.

Having said that, I can assure you from my own correspondence with members of the Board that they are *not* at all happy about this. I think you can see that from their own point of view: they believe (and they are right) that their Registry Agreement has effectively been subverted, and their "restricted" TLD is on the verge of becoming pretty unrestricted.

Some of you would say, better "unrestricted" than "extinct"! (And I get that argument.)

But I won't go over all that again here - it will only send Greg into apoplexy for fear that his wedding.pro and garden.pro etc etc will be 'stolen' from him by ICANN. To tell you the truth, I wish Greg best of luck if ICANN choose not to challenge him. You take your chances, you gain or lose, but I think he'll most probably gain. I have watched domainers for several years and I like the spirit of ingenuity and opportunism they exercise. In a weird way, if ICANN don't act to defend their position, then I'll be delighted for Michael Silver. There's somebody who took an enormous punt - almost a ludicrous initiative at the outset, and just think what a coup he will have pulled off if all those prime names of his turn out to make him wealthy.

Having said all that, there is a possibility that ICANN will move to amend the Registry terms, in order to reclaim the initiative with .pro. The reason they may do this is because there are other restricted domains to come, such as .travel, and they may take the view that this is a precedent that needs to be stopped in its tracks.

I'm sorry to hold views that get some people worked up, but I genuinely don't think that EnCirca have acted in accordance with the aims of the Registry Agreement. I simply don't. But I respect people's right to have views opposing mine so I'm not going to despair about that.

When I was engaged in the struggle (along with others) to make ICANN address the registrar fraud that occurred in 2001 in the launch of the first New TLDs, I received death threats and all kinds of stuff. But to be honest, when you've worked in Prisons this domain business is very mild stuff by comparison.

I will ask questions. I will express opinions. I make no comment on the (slightly flattering) headline billing I get in this thread (well, flattering because get real guys, do you seriously think I can change ICANN's minds). I won't post again in this thread because that might indeed be dumb! So that leaves the road open for my detractors: have a great time!

Meanwhile, I'll keep posting in various threads and forums if I have further points to make. Good luck to everyone, and may the mighty ICANN (who I don't think I've ever been on the side of before!) make their own decisions.

A parting thought: even if ICANN choose to amend the Agreement and cancel the registrations (they would probably do that with effect from the first annual verification), what happens if RegistryPro just say: "No thanks"?

It's pretty obvious from RegistryPro's stance to date that they've known exactly what's been going on, so their game plan seems to me to be to front it out, and hope ICANN just accepts it as a fait accomplis. After all, they'll make loads more money that way. So what if ICANN wants amendments and the Registry says 'No'. Is there somebody here who can tell me whether ICANN can then enforce their wishes? I'm not sure they can (even if they had a will to?).

But if they have a will to, and if they can, then the shit hits the fan. The point is, if the purpose of any Registry Agreement can be stood on its head (because, let's face it, the ICANN contracts have been dreadfully loose and *in my view* poorly written... now I'll probably be sued by Louis Touton!) then what's the point of these Agreements at all. It becomes anything goes. That's why I personally disagree with EnCirca's actions.

But I think I understand why others support them.

The gamble to buck the system failed for Konrad Plankenstein and his 4981 .info domains. Maybe Michael Silver (who to be plain has faked nothing, Plankenstein did) will pull off the 'big one'.

I wish him well if he succeeds, and have found him a decent and thoughtful man in correspondence, but I do not agree with the actions of EnCirca and RegistryPro even if I will be pleased for him as an individual.

Richard

**seeker** · 03-29-2005, 01:59 AM

Icann did nothing in many cases, including the non intervention by companies in the drop business who stopped dropping their names and auctioning them because of a loop hole in the ICANN agreement.
Encirca found a way to bypass their agreement LEGALLY.
Wether one agrees with this or not is a different story.
It is the method of reaction that is in question, and I, although respect Richards right to do whatever he wishes, do not like the way in which he has launched a crusade against encirca.
I also highly question his motives. That is just my opinion.

**Steen** · 03-29-2005, 03:18 AM

We have reps for ICANN on DNForum?

**sharename** · 03-31-2005, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seeker

Icann did nothing in many cases, including the non intervention by companies in the drop business who stopped dropping their names and auctioning them because of a loop hole in the ICANN agreement.
Encirca found a way to bypass their agreement LEGALLY.
Wether one agrees with this or not is a different story.
It is the method of reaction that is in question, and I, although respect Richards right to do whatever he wishes, do not like the way in which he has launched a crusade against encirca.
I also highly question his motives. That is just my opinion.

I agree. ICANN's resources are better spent towards true contract violations.

The should live with the contract they agreed to with RPro.

Now if they were willing to relax the restrictions...the reception might be more positive.