ICANN complaint against Telnames

@Dan, @Mark

I'm afraid a response of "close critical threads" or "keep calm and carry on" no longer cuts it with the current situation Telnic .tel owners now find themselves in, through no fault of their own.

We all know that the vast majority of Roadmap items scheduled for completion no later than 30 June 2011 have not been completed even now, 15 months later, due to the switch in Telnic's resources to develop the Telnames template, control panel and web site.

The Roadmap suddenly disappeared on 1 July 2011, we were told everything would then be done by the .Telegraph newsletter, which itself ceased publication on 1 March 2012.

Telnic's forum remains "locked-down", making it imposssible for newbies to read posts without registering and logging-in - it must be the only major forum that blocks casual readers like this.

And all this from a company that says it is committed to changing the way the world communicates !

There was no pressing reason to create Telnames Ltd. and then refuse to let loyal existing Telnic .tel owners benefit from the development of the new Telnames template, with it's easy-to-use control panel giving user input of background image, video, image gallery and discount coupon.

Telnic Ltd. could have simply added the new Telnames template onto the selection of existing Telnic templates and then marketed .tel worldwide, rather than the current situation whereby they are marketing Telnames version of .tel only and leaving Telnic subdomain .tel owners out in the cold as far as "Joe Public" is concerned.

But given that all the above has happened, and being pragmatic, the very least Telnic should do now is to offer the new Telnames template to its loyal existing customers via their current registrars.

Apart from anything else, it will head off a revolt by Telnic registrars when they find out that the template that so many of their customers want cannot be sold by them as retailers, only by a subsidiary of their supplier.

Retailers tend to vote with their feet and lose interest in selling a product when their supplier starts selling direct, even if it is via a subsidiary.

So it is in Telnic's long-term interests to let their registrars have the new Telnames template (assuming they want to keep selling via registrars) and in Telnic .tel owners short-term interest to have it as well !

So what's the problem in doing this - or is Telnic prepared to risk alienating all the Telnic .tel owners and its registrars as well by refusing this very reasonable request ?

http://MikeSeaton.tel

Mike...

I think we all can agree that Roadmaps are simply planned targets that in today's fast paced world change rapidly due to Scope Creep, Requirements Changes, Compliance Conflicts, Resourcing, Economy Changes, etc. Couple these factors with a platform that serves a Global audience and ANY plan over 30 days has a very high probability to change.

Whatever Telnic's reasons are, it is their right and perspective to manage their business the way they so desire. Telnic offers products and services that we in turn opt to purchase. Like IBM, NCR, Verisign, Godaddy, McDonald's etc.. Telnic can lock down, backstroke, take input or not -- ultimately it is up to them to manage their investments.

Despite our opinions and stances, at the end of the day we each have to determine what direction we plan to take. Realistically, their will be NO revolts over a Registry. For every disgruntled person, I am confident there will be more standing by to make their investments work and in return work twice as hard to suppress negative stances that in turn may jeopardize their investments.

What is not working for one may be working just fine for others because they found a niche' or defined a model that works for them. Why do we not hear about all of those, probably because they are busy executing their plans and driving business.

Mike and members of this forum, I am confident that Telnic like any company has challenges, obstacles and plans that we are not privy to. Not because of super secrets but because we are NOT employees, shareholders, and part of the company structure responsible for the overall program.

If we can continue to find methods of communicating our concerns and requirements respectfully, celebrate more successes, and learn how to support each other it is possible that frustrations will subside.

The only person that can disappoint me is me. If I point the finger at someone else, then I am shifting blame for my failure to understand what I was fully signing up for before getting involved.

So, how do we move forward as a team? Lot's of good stuff comes through here.

Thanks
Dan Prather
www.danprather.tel

This whole escalation wouldn't have happened if Telnic wouldn't have stopped their communication last year.
It is very important for Telnic to talk to their community, at least with the information the community isn't forgotten and some things are happening in London. They would earn a lot of understanding.
For this reason I think this topic is important for Telnic to get the insight it is not okay to let everybody in the dark.

I think, that most of all that arose from Telnic’ wish to save money on its press-attache’s salary. It always is better for a company when specific works are done by professionals. In particular, the communication with public should be provided by professional press-attaché.

That work, as I remember, formerly did Nadya, the former Telnic’s director for relations with public. Now, when she gone, Telnic try to do her job itself. The results of that “homemade” communication, as it seems for me, are very poor.

For those who like reading legal documents here is the agreement between ICANN and the registry Telnic Ltd., including 4 amendments added between June 2007 and February 2011 - click http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/tel to view.

Section (b)(1) in Amendment No 1 at http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/tel/registry-agmt-amendment-09jul07-en.htm is worth noting as it seems to imply Telnic can hold domain registration data (and be charged by ICANN for it) down to subdomain level eg. John.Smith.tel - is this a correct interpretation of this clause ?

http://MikeSeaton.tel

mikeseaton wrote:For those who like reading legal documents here is the agreement between ICANN and the registry Telnic Ltd., including 4 amendments added between June 2007 and February 2011 - click http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/tel to view.

Some interesting stuff can be found at the above link, particularly in the main Agreement at http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/tel/tel-agreement-07apr06-en.htm

This includes the expiry date of Telnic's agreement to run the .tel gTLD (10 years from the "Effective Date" unless renewal terms agreed with ICANN), multi-million dollar fines that ICANN could impose on Telnic following a number of failures to "operate in good faith", and an obligation to involve the "Sponsored TLD Community" (.tel domain registrants and service/application providers) in certain aspects of the development of the .tel gTLD.

So Telnic appears to have a lot more ICANN-enforceable obligations towards us than I certainly thought existed !

http://MikeSeaton.tel

This whole situation is because telnic have one vision that is of a telnames type simple contact domain, and what we needed and wanted from it differs greatly or is more than telnic is willing to do as it differs with their core vision, the whole reason they invested their lives in it's development.

So forum lock down, no roadmap, no contact, no etc is all symptoms of the need for a CEO/staff change, unfortunately UK companies are not like USA corporations as there's no board of directors at telnic that can appoint a new CEO who's willing to listen to what their customers need outside of the core vision? and we don't even know if telnames was created because we had needs or because they had plans..

So in the end if you're going to make an official complaint then you need to be the people who have had the least unproductive contact with them, aka not me who has and can be painted as a "bad actor" and easily brushed off as an upset customer as that's all it will come down too in the end, as when it's you vs them they'll just keep painting you regardless of what regulations they have to be held towards as causing them to have to take measures to protect themselves from these bad actors.

So mikeseaton is fine to pursuit this but I can't take part as I have railed at them on twitter and at ICANN's twitter about this in the past, stating that at the time I was not happy with how it seemed, but also the original owner of s-ucks.tel should not take part as I am more than positive they have evidence collected that will just paint your whole community movement as "bad actors" stirring up a pot regardless of what regulations they're alleged to have broken.

A complaint to ICANN about a registry's actions is actually quite easy to make, and does not involve any legal costs, just a bit of time to ensure that you set your case out clearly.

The page http://www.icann.org/en/resources/compliance/complaint-submission describes how to do it:

To report that a gTLD registry operator or sponsor is in violation of its registry agreement with ICANN, please submit a detailed email to compliance@icann.org.

I would imagine if there was a complaint about the setting up of a subsidiary company Telnames Ltd. with the subsequent denial to Telnic .tel registrants of the Telnames template then it would probably come under the "good faith" category, which can result in multi-million dollar fines for a registry.

I do wish Telnic would just do the decent thing and make available to Telnic .tel registrants the Telnames template without all this talk of ICANN complaints.

What is really crazy is that having 200K Telnames templates out there, rather than a paltry 2K, would hugely increase Telnic/Telnames value and legitimacy !

So why the resistance to keeping your customers happy, Telnic ?

http://MikeSeaton.tel

I deeply hope Telnic will know how to prevent this initiative by responding wisely - or responding at all.
We really don't need any fight between Telnic and its customers.

I don't understand Telnic.

Is it really so difficult
to address your customers
and tell them a little
about the plan to
reduce the confusion?

Frankly spoken I don't care
if Telnic is doing everything
right.
What I'm mad about is they
do their own thing, forget
their customers wishes and
don't think it's necessary to
keep them informed about
anything.

If you dig in any business,
you will find things which
give reasons for reclamation,
are not correct or are even
illegal.
But the worst case is if you
don't treat your customers
as they deserve; even more
if all complains remains
unanswered.

I want Telnic to change this
behavior.
The only thing I request is
them to give only a small
outlook for software
development.
If Telnic can't fulfill even
this small plea, then it is
urgently required to speak
to ICANN.
This even more as I'm
convinced Telnic won't
change their habits.

Freedom for .tel wrote:I don't understand Telnic.

Is it really so difficult
to address your customers
and tell them a little
about the plan to
reduce the confusion?

Join the club - I can't understand how a company can be hell bent on ignoring it's only source of revenue (once the $35,000,000 initial funding runs out of course) !

It's a shame if Telnic continues to refuse to operate a level playing field and, despite using it's registry resources to develop the Telnames template, carries on denying its existing .tel customers access to it.

There is a clause in the registry agreement that basically says a registry has a legal requirement to treat all its registrars the same.

It's not likely to be difficult to show ICANN that Telnic are not doing this - allowing it's subsidiary Telnames (operating through the Key-Systems GMBH registrar) access to a registry-funded template that is denied to other .tel registrars.

There is also another clause detailing Telnic's obligations to involve the "Sponsored Community" (that's us domain owners plus service/app providers) in "developing or enforcing standards, policies, procedures, or practices with respect to the TLD".

Again it shouldn't be difficult to show that this is not happening in practice.

So two possible breaches of Telnic's legal agreement with ICANN, and that's from just a very quick perusal of what Telnic has signed up to.

Telnic's agreement to run .tel lasts for 10 years only - after that renewal terms have to be agreed with ICANN - but there are procedures for early termination and multi-million dollar fines if Telnic does not stick to what it has legally signed up to with ICANN.

So the ball really is now in Telnic's court - treat your customers with fairness, respect and involvement - or risk the response from ICANN over what looks like failure to stick to the registry terms you have legally agreed to with them.

http://MikeSeaton.tel

mikeseaton wrote:
There is a clause in the registry agreement that basically says a registry has a legal requirement to treat all its registrars the same.

Thank you!

I'll integrate this
and more facts
into my complaint.

Can I file a complaint at ICANN against blind customers who don't see the progress?

No response from
Telnic until now?

Surprise!

Just want to let
you know about
this e-mail response:

ICANN is in receipt of your complaint regarding the .TEL Registry Operator. ICANN is investigating your claims to determine if the .TEL Registry Agreement http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/tel has been breached. If it is determined that the .TEL Registry Agreement has been breached, ICANN will take appropriate compliance action.

Thank you for contacting ICANN regarding this important matter.

Sincerely,


ICANN Contractual Compliance

What are the possibilities now?
Telnames could be shut down.
Telnic could be forced to bring the same attention to Telnic customers as to Telnames customers.
Telnic could pay a penalty.
Telnic could reactivate the development for their control panel and the communication with their community.
Telnic could get future observation by ICANN.
Telnic could be angry and move back from their customer base even more.
Telnic could find convincing excuses and nothing could happen.
The easiest solution for Telnic to solve this problem probably would be to integrate the template from Telnames into the control panel from Telnic.
With the last option the chances for Telnic to avoid any further action would be the greatest.
Hopefully Telnic will learn it is better to communicate with their customers.
Certainly it is better answering to them than to ICANN.

Sunrise wrote:The easiest solution for Telnic to solve this problem probably would be to integrate the template from Telnames into the control panel from Telnic.

Telnic will try everything to prevent doing this, because:

1. Telnames would lose their competitive advantage
   
2. Telnic want their registrars doing the programming for them which has been already stopped at Telnic.

See http://www.teltalk.org/t642-is-telnames-allowed-to-sell-domains#3352 for further info on the legal basis for a complaint to ICANN.

http://MikeSeaton.tel

TelTalk wrote:Today I had a chat with Justin Hayward, Business Development and Communications Director for Telnic.

It was easy to notice he isn’t happy about the recent content on TelTalk.

Nothing personal Justin, but isn't "Communications Director for Telnic" a contradiction in terms - since the one thing Telnic does NOT do is communicate with its .tel users ?

The irony of it all - a company that wants to change the way the world communicates - but can't do the most simple of communication itself !

http://MikeSeaton.tel

mikeseaton wrote:

mikeseaton wrote:For those who like reading legal documents here is the agreement between ICANN and the registry Telnic Ltd., including 4 amendments added between June 2007 and February 2011 - click http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/tel to view.

Some interesting stuff can be found at the above link, particularly in the main Agreement at http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/tel/tel-agreement-07apr06-en.htm

This includes the expiry date of Telnic's agreement to run the .tel gTLD (10 years from the "Effective Date" unless renewal terms agreed with ICANN), multi-million dollar fines that ICANN could impose on Telnic following a number of failures to "operate in good faith", and an obligation to involve the "Sponsored TLD Community" (.tel domain registrants and service/application providers) in certain aspects of the development of the .tel gTLD.

So Telnic appears to have a lot more ICANN-enforceable obligations towards us than I certainly thought existed !

Telnic should not forget that involving the "Sponsored TLD Community" in certain aspects of the development of the .tel gTLD is actually a legal requirement by ICANN - not an "optional extra" that can be ignored !

No doubt Freedom for .tel will have mentioned this obligation in the formal complaint he made to ICANN re the Telnames situation.

http://MikeSeaton.tel

It is not nice it has come so far, but Telnic has this situation self-inflicted.
Telnic did not even try to stop this process with openness and communication to their customers.
Why they think they can ignore all of this?

Expert wrote:It is not nice it has come so far, but Telnic has this situation self-inflicted.
Telnic did not even try to stop this process with openness and communication to their customers.
Why they think they can ignore all of this?

Because they've got away with doing so up to now !

It's been very bad for their business, but they still have a cushion of several million in the bank (see http://companycheck.co.uk/company/03555437 then "Key Financials").

I wish I had - then I would ignore .tel totally !

http://MikeSeaton.tel

mikeseaton wrote:Because they've got away with doing so up to now !

Yes, they don't see any advantage in speeding things up.

mikeseaton wrote:Would be nice to know the future of the Telnames template !

How the **** can those involved with .tel plan ahead with such uncertainty around ?

IF the complaint by "Freedom for .tel" against Telnic is successful it would seem logical that ICANN would require Telnic (via their Telnames subsidiary) to STOP selling Telnames .tels (i.e. those with the http://YourBusiness.tel template).

I can't really imagine any sort of halfway-house punishment here, either Telnames is allowed to sell .tels or they are not !

If they are NOT allowed to sell .tels any more, what then happens to the Telnames template and the existing Telnames customers ?

Presumably the customers would be transferred to an existing Telnic Registrar, in that case the Telnames template would have to go to that registrar as well.

I just don't understand how Telnic manage to create problem after problem for themselves - if they had just added the Telnames template to the Telnic control panel (as we expected when the template first surfaced) there would be none of this anger, frustration, annoyance, call it what you will, with Telnic.

Perhaps they just don't care any more ?

http://MikeSeaton.tel

mikeseaton wrote:Anyone know how long it normally takes for ICANN to issue their adjudication in response to a formal complaint ?

I don't know, but can it be Telnic has the luck being the first registry being the object of a registry complaint at ICANN?