Re: [TLDA-Members] PUBLICROOT REPRESENTATIVE NOTICE - VALIDATION OF AKZO-NOBEL AND AKZONOBEL TLDS FAILED (fwd)

[David Scott]

Is this a just a due action to create a database for record, of
fraudanlent tlds, and tlds that are to remove from resolving dns structures.
After a short search I see that the UCANN2 databases are resolving this
name. Should this name be pulled from all DNS roots, that the UCANN2
populates?

And if so, what shall we do with that name, since at one time is was
resolving.

I propose a database for this names to be moved to, for further
informative areas.
Each TLD getting it's own table, for growing updates, and resolutions
pertaining to the name in question. Since this is not a collision, it
should be handled on a tracking system. UCANN2 will be creating a
database for such use, with an interactive interface as well.

Thoughts questions, comments.
This database should be allowed to let appointed personall from
different avunes to update, and change infromation.

This is now the time to strick, time to put all differences to the side,
come together and gain control. Certain pieces are already in motion,
and working to
fix this major issue, the backing of the TLDA is in order, wiether they
are ready or not. Now is the time.

What say ye?

--
David Scott http://ucann2.org
UCANN2 - see the worlds network.
sco...@ucann2.org
+1 678 343-5202 mobile
+1 770 267-4361 office

Marc Schneiders wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007, at 18:20 [=GMT-0400], Karl E. Peters wrote:
>
>> Marc Schneiders wrote:
>>> I am not personally familiar with the situation. I would say it would
>>> be a good idea to do something. Doing something other than
>>> reorganizing might prove to be more beneficial for the TLDA itself.
>>> Apart from the fact, which is more important, that this sort of
>>> situations fall under the tasks the original TLDA set out in its
>>> bylaws.
>>
>> How could you possibly not be familiar with our situation after being
>> upset when I suggested you were anything other than a fully active
>> member of the Board of Directors? Amazing!
>
> Don't try to make a game for your own political PR campaign out of it.
> I was referring to the question at hand: The AkzoNobel TLDs. I am not
> personally familiar with that. I thought that was what you were asking
> about, since AkzoNobel is a Dutch company.
>
>> In any event, what do you think of my recent (earlier today)
>> counter-suggestion as one thing we MIGHT be able to assist with? Are
>> you willing to help? We are really not proclaiming readiness to
>> advocate until the end of our organizational period at the end of
>> January, but what I suggested is at least doable, if not dramatically
>> helpful... YOUR thoughts? What should be our goal in taking action
>> here? What are the chances that what we COULD do would actually help?
>
> I am afraid I cannot participate in any committee, if that is what you
> are referring to. I've explained clearly enough, how I think over your
> takeover of the TLDA. How could I accept an appointment from a "board"
> I do consider illegal?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Mem...@TLDA.NET
> http://MAIL.TLDA.NET/mailman/listinfo/members
>

[David Scott]

I have to agree with Marc on this point. It is usually Joe that does
gets things moving, I found it very interesting, that nothing happens,
and then when some issue comes, it is Joe that brings it up, and then
the only things I see is that and I quote, "Joe is trying to use the
TLDA again." Maybe if the TLDA actually did somethingt, beside site
around and waitning for everything to fall apart, some people might
actually take this organization seriously. Personally, I have sent
people to this organization to sign up, and read what the movement of
the TLDA is, and the responses I get... "It's a solution to a problem
that doesn't exist."; "...there's nothing there'.... Go out and ask
people if they are ready for the change of the internet. response I have
gotten; "..why? it works for me."; "there's no need to change it".

People don't believe the TLDA, and if the TLDA doesn't start suppling
something, then no one is going to take the TLDA seriously.
Sitting by, watching and waiting, doing nothing, is exactly that, doing
nothing. Make some guidelines to follow, period, then you can start to
enforce them. And John's statement, about the TLDA not having a view...
then what's the point of the TLDA, if the TLDA doesn't have a view on
any issue... Then you are not going to have many followers.

Marc Schneiders wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, at 08:17 [=GMT-0500], John Palmer wrote:
>
>> Oh and who says that a "Scam" has occurred? Joe?
>> So far, thats all I see here.
>>
>> Show me a court case/docket number where someone
>> was sued for this issue and then maybe we can find
>> some time to deal with it in between re-organizing the
>> TLDA.
>
> Well, if there would be a court case, I'd say the TLDA would have to
> be careful in expressing its views...
>
> Not all problems need to be settled in court. That is an idea lawyers
> are trying to sell us. In my part of the big water we have other, less
> espensive (or should I say: less lucrative?) than law suits.
>
>> My point is that we have nothing but an official looking >
>> opinion-piece from Joe.
>
> I guess it wouldn't be difficult to ask him to get the AkzoNobel
> position in writing.
>
>> I suggest that if we in the TLDA really have that much
>> time on our hands, to investigate and do proper due
>> dilligence on this matter (so we dont get sued ourselves
>> for going off half-cocked), that we spend that effort
>> on the reorganization effort.
>
> How is it progressing?

>
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Mem...@TLDA.NET
> http://MAIL.TLDA.NET/mailman/listinfo/members
>

--

[Joe Baptista]

David - thank you for bring this to my attention. I want to respond to
Marc Schneiders comments - see below quotes. I am also sending tis out
to Herman Xennt and TLDA directors as it applies to them.

>Marc Schneiders wrote:
>
>
>>On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, at 08:17 [=GMT-0500], John Palmer wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Oh and who says that a "Scam" has occurred? Joe?
>>>So far, thats all I see here.
>>>
>>>Show me a court case/docket number where someone
>>>was sued for this issue and then maybe we can find
>>>some time to deal with it in between re-organizing the
>>>TLDA.
>>>
>>>
>>Well, if there would be a court case, I'd say the TLDA would have to
>>be careful in expressing its views...
>>
>>Not all problems need to be settled in court. That is an idea lawyers
>>are trying to sell us. In my part of the big water we have other, less
>>espensive (or should I say: less lucrative?) than law suits.
>>
>>

Well I would be pleased with the record being removed. The TLDA has
bylaws that require it to act in the best interests of the Inclusive
Name Space. The comments from John Palmer do not surprise me - he is a
root operator for Herman Xennt. As such he has a direct conflict of
interest a director of the TLDA. S does Gene Marsh who sat on the board
of the INAIC council and it's predecessor NewRoot.

>>
>>
>>>My point is that we have nothing but an official looking >
>>>opinion-piece from Joe.
>>>
>>>
>>I guess it wouldn't be difficult to ask him to get the AkzoNobel
>>position in writing.
>>
>>

I'm not sure if they will give it. At this time the matter is in the
legal department under investigation. So it would be prudent for them
to say nothing. I also as the publicroot representative do not need
their position in writing. I spoke with Ms. Annemiek Kadijk directly by
phone. I don't require notices in writing to confirm an authorization.
I contact them directly and they either confirm or deny that they
authorized the TLD.

I am willing to provide the TLDA with my notes. Those contain the email
addresses and contact telephone numbers of the people at AkzoNobel who I
spoke to or emailed. Notes also contain details of emails sent or
received. The TLDA need only request my notes and they will be
provided. I have no problem whatsoever with that. Also I have no
problem with providing any director of the TLDA with the contact details
for Ms. Annemiek Kadijk, Legal Council, Intellectual Property
Department, AkzoNobel B.V.

Also the TLDA would be wise to send email directly to Herman Xennt and
ask the same questions.

It would in fact be more appropriate that the TLDA request any position
in writing directly from Ms. Annemiek Kadijk. That I see as being the
most appropriate course of action and shows the TLDA is actually doing
something - i.e. protecting the interests of the Inclusive Name Space -
as per it's bylaws. Thats all I expect of the TLDA. That it do it's
designated job.

I have done the difficult part of the job. I have contacted
AkzoNobel. I have spoken with some three individuals before I got a
responsible party. ANd its been a few weeks work. The details are all
in my notes. Now if the TLDA can't send some emails out and do it's own
enquiry on this then I respectfully submit I don't buy that.
Reorganization is no excuse for allowing a scam to continue. And I hold
the directors legally responsible for failing to act. Anyone would who
can see how this is all unfolding.

>>
>>
>>>I suggest that if we in the TLDA really have that much
>>>time on our hands, to investigate and do proper due
>>>dilligence on this matter (so we dont get sued ourselves
>>>for going off half-cocked), that we spend that effort
>>>on the reorganization effort.
>>>
>>>
>>How is it progressing?
>>
>>

Exacyly - all we get from Mr. Palmer are excuses. Of course I expect
this as Mr. Palmer is involved in this scam. And the scam is growing.
AkzoNobel is only the tip of the iceberg. I have audited a number of
TLDs that are associated with Brand Names or Trademarks. I have not
exclusively limited myself to INAIC TLDs. I have also audited a number
of UnifiedRoot TLDs too

So far all UnifiedRoots TLD have been validated as being authorized by
the official trademark holder or brand name owner. Non of the INAIC
TLDs have be validated as authorized. Expect many more notices.

Hermans Response to this to date is to make these records private. If
you use the whois search engin at INAIC you will see that the AkzoNobel
TLDs are now setup as private resgitrations. This act removes the
contact details from the INAIC whois. I think Herman has a false sense
of reality going on in his head. All Trademark and Brand Name owners
who's information, trademarks or brand names have been infringed on by
Herman Xennt have been contacted. They have all verified their
information is on the INAIC whois. The all have recordsof this. Whois
Herman the vermin trying to kid. Not the companies who've been screwed.

I therefore ask Herman Xennt - unofficially - to obey my request notice
and remove these trademarks completely from the INAIC whois and DNS.
Its in your best interests Herman.

If any feels my controbution to keeping the Inclusive Name Space honest
has value - then I ask that you contribute cash to the cause.

http://www.publicroot.org/donations.html

regards
joe baptista

--
Joe Baptista www.publicroot.org
PublicRoot Consortium
----------------------------------------------------------------
The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive,
Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Office: +1 (202) 517-1593
Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084

[David Scott]

So is this a statement that the TLDA will do nothing, as far as any investigation as to the fraudulent statement to base a statement off of?
What is the function of the TLDA?

If the TLDA has no statment on the misuse of a TLD pertaining to a fraudulent, and published fraudulent use of a TLD, what does this say about the TLDA?
Does the TLDA allow an individual to create a TLD that is used in conjunction to scam others to make more money, and sit by to do nothing, and state that it doesn't get involved?

The use of Top Level Domain Association or TLDA in the first email, quoted from Mr. Joe Baptista.
    This notice shall be distributed to the Directors of the Top Level Domain Association,   
    The PublicRoot Representative further requests that the Directors of the Top Level Domain Association investigate    
    The PublicRoot Representative hereby submits this notice as a complaint to the Top Level Domain Association.

The name "TLDA" was never used.

Quoted from Mr. John Palmer :
"the TLDA has not given Joe Baptista the right to use the TLDA name,"
Joe didn't use the name, outside of the above names. This was never a question. Say why is it being brought up?

Do the members have rights to use the TLDA name? As I am a member do I have right to use the TLDA name?


-- 
David Scott   http://ucann2.org

UCANN2 - see the worlds network.
sco...@ucann2.org
	+1 678 343-5202	mobile
	+1 770 267-4361	office

John Palmer wrote:

I have not signed any agreement with Xennt or anyone else. 
Xennt has no right to claim that the TLDA supports him or 
not - we have not issued a statement on that.

As important,  the TLDA has not given Joe Baptista the
right to use the TLDA name, nor has it allowed him to be
a spokesperson for the TLDA.

Remember BOTH of those things.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roeland MEYER - net" <Roe...@Caselle-vpn.net>
To: "Marc Schneiders" <ma...@schneiders.org>; "John Palmer" <j...@adns.net>
Cc: <mem...@TLDA.NET>
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 10:27 AM
Subject: RE: [TLDA-Members] PUBLICROOT REPRESENTATIVE NOTICE - VALIDATIONOFAKZO-NOBEL AND AKZONOBEL TLDS FAILED (fwd)


  

For different reasons, I agree with John. "Nothing" is an
appropriate response here. The TLDA is not directly named as
either a defendant or a plaintiff, even if we have a vague
third-party interest. At worst case, we can file a "We don't now a
damned thing"/"Not on our watch" statement. In fact, we don't. I
do not see any contracts where Xent has a right to use the TLDA
name anyway, unless John signed one when all of us weren't
looking.

How about it John? Did you?

--
R O E L A N D   M J   M E Y E R
Avenue Viollier 24
1260 Nyon, Switzerland
Mob: +41(0)79295 14 68
Web: http://www.roelandmeyer.org
Mail: mailto:roel...@roelandmeyer.org



    

-----Original Message-----
From: members...@TLDA.NET
[mailto:members...@TLDA.NET]On
Behalf Of Marc Schneiders
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 3:30 PM
To: John Palmer
Cc: mem...@TLDA.NET
Subject: Re: [TLDA-Members] PUBLICROOT REPRESENTATIVE NOTICE -
VALIDATIONOFAKZO-NOBEL AND AKZONOBEL TLDS FAILED (fwd)


On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, at 08:17 [=GMT-0500], John Palmer wrote:

      

Oh and who says that a "Scam" has occurred? Joe?
So far, thats all I see here.

Show me a court case/docket number where someone
was sued for this issue and then maybe we can find
some time to deal with it in between re-organizing the
TLDA.
        

Well, if there would be a court case, I'd say the TLDA
would have to
be careful in expressing its views...

Not all problems need to be settled in court. That is
an idea lawyers
are trying to sell us. In my part of the big water we
have other, less
espensive (or should I say: less lucrative?) than law suits.

      

My point is that
we have nothing but an official looking >
        

opinion-piece from Joe.

I guess it wouldn't be difficult to ask him to get the
AkzoNobel
position in writing.

      

I suggest that if we in the TLDA really have that much
time on our hands, to investigate and do proper due
dilligence on this matter (so we dont get sued ourselves
for going off half-cocked), that we spend that effort
on the reorganization effort.
        

How is it progressing?

_______________________________________________
Members mailing list
Mem...@TLDA.NET
http://MAIL.TLDA.NET/mailman/listinfo/members

      

--
http://home.caselle-vpn.net
Complaints mailto:ab...@caselle-vpn.net



    

[David Scott]

Actually, I'm starting to build a database, that will track any and all fraud or any other TLD that's to be pulled from the respository I hold, this
record will be published through the UCANN2.ORG web site, as accurate as the day it is published, with the information I hold.

You want to know what I'll do to help, wheres everyone else's contribution. I have seen nothing for over a month.

And yes, it is a statement that was publish on the web-site. Anyone reading it, would assume now, the first to be found as
possible fraudulent that TLDA states, it does nothing.... deductive reasoning, after the 30th possible fraudulent finding the TLDA would do nothing.

I have moved forward, and now have 3 or 4 databases, and am in design to implement another database, listed above.
I will be official releasing a new web-layout.

As far as contributing, I have contributed many ways, and still do today.
I resolve TLD's for individuals, for no charge, and haven't ask for a penny in exchange, one of which is you Karl, and your web-sites as well.. Are you addressing my method of help. I believe instead of attacking some
one's questions, and method of help, the TLDA and official board members, should get their act together before starting to attack some questions, that are very to the point.

The bylaws state one thing, and the statement clearly states another.
Is it general practices that the TLDA side-step their own bylaws, because if so, the TLDA can not be any better then the organization that the TLDA is trying to get a handle on.



Karl E. Peters wrote:

> 

> So is this a statement that the TLDA will do nothing, as far as any investigation as to the fraudulent statement to base a statement off of? 

> What is the function of the TLDA? 

> 

> If the TLDA has no statment on the misuse of a TLD pertaining to a fraudulent, and published fraudulent use of a TLD, what does this say about the TLDA? 

> Does the TLDA allow an individual to create a TLD that is used in conjunction to scam others to make more money, and sit by to do nothing, and state that it doesn't get involved? 

David,

       Have you read anything I had to say on this? Why pick the point you disagree with and assume that would be the final stand for the TLDA even before response to my suggestions has come, even from you.  What do YOU think we can do and how much are you willing to do to help?

-Karl

[David Scott]

John Palmer wrote:

No one has the right to speak for the TLDA unless authorized to do so by

the Board of Directors.

 

You can say "I am a TLDA Member", but you have no right to speak for the

TLDA or to claim that the TLDA has position X or Y unless they have published

such a position.

Doesn't the members make up the TLDA?
And if I have a position, that does make a position in the TLDA?
Or are you clearly stating the TLDA will not listen to it's members.  Seems to be doing a good job on this one.

 

As for the so-called "Scam", we have nothing but Joe's claim that there has

been a scam. Again, the TLDA is not a court of law or other regulatory body

and it should not take sides in disputes.

 

WHEN and IF we get re-organized, the TapRoot and Compliance committees

will be responsible for collecting a list of all known TLDs and determining

which versions of colliding TLDs have the most legitimate claim by applying

our criteria.

I'm pretty sure by the time the TLDA actually gets moving forward the problem will already be solved.
You're done with the discussion, I have yet to see you sir, contribute anything at all on a constructive note.
You're done sir. you are the acting secretary of the TLDA, you are never done. You're done, is this your official statement?

 

At this time, the organization is still in the re-org phase and we are not in

a position to operate our Taproot. There are no Taproot committee members

nor are there any Compliance committee members.

 

And what is the progress of this?

I consider the matter closed. You can of course, continue to beat a dead

horse, and I'm sure that is exactly what Joe wants, but I'm done with such a

discussion.

 

Your statement could kill a dead horse again and again, you haven't yet answered any question ever posed to you.
And why is this sir? Of course, this is a mute question as you will side-step yet again.

John

Quoted from Mr. John Palmer :
"the TLDA has not given Joe Baptista the right to use the TLDA name,"
Joe didn't use the name, outside of the above names. This was never a question. Say why is it being brought up?

Do the members have rights to use the TLDA name? As I am a member do I have right to use the TLDA name?