Due Diligence for the Quality of the RIPE NCC Registration Data
[Apologies for duplicate emails] Dear colleagues, The RIPE NCC procedural document, "Due Diligence for the Quality of the RIPE NCC Registration Data", has been published. The document is available at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/due-diligence The RIPE NCC has a mandate from the RIPE community to keep an up-to-date and correct Internet number resource registry. In order to comply with this mandate, the RIPE NCC performs due diligence on organisations the RIPE NCC registers Internet number resource for. This document outlines the minimum information and documentation the RIPE NCC requires to make sure that the registration data is valid and up-to-date. Regards, Axel Pawlik Managing Director RIPE NCC
The Domain Tools lawsuit where they sought to declare that their harvesting and resale of whois information without permission is "lawful" has been dismissed by a US Federal District court judge. The decision is at: http://network-tools.com/domain-Tools-dismissal.pdf The lead attorney for the case is Derek Newman. (He is the attorney who represented mass e-mailers and defended cases brought by James Gordon and had him designated as a "vexatious litigant" and has his personal items sold at auction to pay the legal fees. Newman was also staff counsel to Seattle's "porn king" and boasts how they were good friends in published reports at Wired.com). The lawsuit was brought shortly after a complaint was filed with the privacy office of Canada about the resale of whois data from Tucows (which is in Canada) without permission. As a result the court has been asked to issue sanctions related to anti-SLAPP laws (SLAPP is "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation"). (This is why some people want to post anonymously). Also, there is a post attributed to Paul Keating shortly after the lawsuit was filed (keating is a domain attorney who is on the board of investors of DomainTools.com and who is the managing director of the company that hold the DomainTools trademark) that says things such as: "...So, file an action seeking damages, serve it, claim damages not to exceed $10,000 and wait for a default. Then try to enforce the default. The reason for the damage limit is to force them into a situation of spending more than $10,000 to defend in AZ or default. ..." http://www.thedomains.com/2012/05/30/berryhill-gets-a-finding-of-reverse-dom... As a result of all this the court has been asked to award monetary judgements against Domain Tools and the law firm of Derek Newman AND have them both labeled as "vexatious litigants." There are also five different stories as to who is actually the parent company of Domain Tools so the court has been asked to require Domain Tools to explain the apparent discrepancies on the court record.
participants (2)
-
Axel Pawlik -
lists＠help.org