Is the government coming?

[Lucien Taylor]

If Minister Ed Vaizey's knee-jerk response to the Nominet porn names scandal this weekend is anything to go by, the government are starting to show its discomfort with (what my MP described as) the 'unsatisfactory relationship' between Nominet and government.

The election results have revealed, if anyone needed reminding, that 17 large registrars are the de facto regulators of Nominet. Nothing can be achieved without their support, so it is not surprising that we are seeing direct.uk, proposals to pick up the expired domains market and hand it to those top 17. There are many amongst the wider body of Nominet's membership who claim that they have not been properly consulted in the direct.uk initiative, that decision whether or not to go ahead at all is based upon the hidden results of a failed V1 consultation process, and 123-reg 'anec-data'.

Ed has a problem. Nominet, with its claim to be fulfilling a public purpose no longer has the ability to fulfil its public purpose. Emily examines this in the light of the election results in her latest blog article - 'Has Nominet been captured?'.

I am not an advocate of government takeover, that would be nearly as hopeless as the situation that we now find ourselves in. However, although Ed Vaizey claims that he has 'no locus' to intervene in Nominet business, I don't believe him. As John Carr put it 'Nominet exists and does what it does because the Government and Parliament are content to allow it so to do'

Ed cannot continue to ignore the banging on his door. The wider membership are unhappy, and are going to get even unhappier as the top 17 restructure the company to take the cream of their businesses. The big brands and little business are going to wake up if Nominet pushes through the direct.uk proposals without proper consultation. Those that care about corporate governance, allegations of breaches of directors' duties and suggested amendments to independent reports will also continue to press for a government response, even if the top 1% of the membership, who push through 80% of the company's turnover, don't .

So, Ed is going to have to do something, eventually. And we may not like the outcome. And the top 17 'foreign' companies who now control this UK asset may like the outcome even less. I wouldn't put a xenophobic response beyond the range of possibilities available to Ed.

So, how can we self regulate? I don't want to watch the destruction of this namespace, or its credibility in the world any more than anyone else, but like the banking industry, it is destroying itself.

How can we bang the heads of the top 17, and get them to consult with us, the wider membership to resolve Nominet's problems? To attend fewer dinners laid on for the elite, and more round tables? To work with their fellow owners? To self-regulate?

 

[PaulGregory]

Blimey, you're connecting a Mail fury with an internal management issue. Big picture stuff.

If Minister Ed Vaizey's knee-jerk response to the Nominet porn names scandal this weekend is anything to go by, the government are starting to show its discomfort with (what my MP described as) the 'unsatisfactory relationship' between Nominet and government.

Yes, but I think the Government do not find the relationship between Government and the web satisfactory either.

More scarily, the Government are too often falling on the side of ill-thought-out simplistic solutions, rather than common sense and accuracy.

It's hard to tell with a Daily Mail piece whether the campaigner, the MP or the journalist misunderstand the differences between domain names, subdomains, and websites. Maybe it is all three.

Lucien, I really can't tell, you quote imbecilic statements but I don't know if you agree with them (and the people who they are attributed to). Do you think we should self regulate by all agreeing not to register domains that could host porn? Do you think that a system that sees no difference between RapeCrisis, RapeSeedOil and RapeForeigners lacks credibility?

 

[Edwin]

There is no story here, as there is no "Nominet porn names scandal". It's an entirely fabricated storm in a tabloid teacup. It's not even worth discussing, because there's not a shred of credibility in the issue. It may feel jolly nice to see a big finger being pointed at Nominet in the press, but unfortunately the reasons for such finger-pointing are entirely misguided.

Also, the government has the power to step in and clobber Nominet any time they like, under the Digital Economy Act, if they really thought the big N was getting out of hand.

The first step to restoring the credibility of Nominet is not to fall prey to tabloid nonsense about non-issues!

 

[Lucien Taylor]

It's hard to tell with a Daily Mail piece whether the campaigner, the MP or the journalist misunderstand the differences between domain names, subdomains, and websites. Maybe it is all three.

When you say campaigner, do you mean me? If so, yes I do understand the difference.

Lucien, I really can't tell, you quote imbecilic statements but I don't know if you agree with them (and the people who they are attributed to). Do you think we should self regulate by all agreeing not to register domains that could host porn? Do you think that a system that sees no difference between RapeCrisis, RapeSeedOil and RapeForeigners lacks credibility?

Sorry for any confusion. What I think about porn names and sites is irrelevant. I didn't quote the statement, I referenced the article, which is in itself a scandal whether you agree with the content or not - it is about an emotive subject, has viraled to several publications and this sort of thing panics the government and the shocked Mail readership. It panicked Go Daddy enough to prompt its own quick reaction.

The fact is that Nominet, I believe, has a good abusive registrations policy, which has disappeared from its website. The thread in my argument is that Nominet is losing trust, its cosy relationship with government is not enough, critical stakeholders, like John Carr, who I'm sorry, are believed by government and the public more than thee and me, are starting to become active.

The spotlight is turning back on the company and its dreadful corporate governance. Effective regulation is not about blocking the registration of domain names that could be used to host porn sites, that would be lunacy. It is about sorting out our considerable problems amongst ourselves. And I see absolutely no evidence of that happening.

 

[PaulGregory]

By "campaigner" I meant John Carr, not yourself. Looking back he's referred to as an advisor, but he has "called on Nominet to ban websites containing certain words like rape" and blogged on the subject advocating his position, so it's fair to call him a campaigner. I do assume anyone posting here actually understands domain names.

So essentially the link between the Mail article and the "dreadful corporate governance" of Nominet is that you think Nominet should be answering back better?

It is about sorting out our considerable problems amongst ourselves. And I see absolutely no evidence of that happening.

Please pick one problem that I stand a chance of helping sorting out and I'll have a go.

 

[Lucien Taylor]

There is no story here, as there is no "Nominet porn names scandal". It's an entirely fabricated storm in a tabloid teacup. It's not even worth discussing, because there's not a shred of credibility in the issue. It may feel jolly nice to see a big finger being pointed at Nominet in the press, but unfortunately the reasons for such finger-pointing are entirely misguided.
Also, the government has the power to step in and clobber Nominet any time they like, under the Digital Economy Act, if they really thought the big N was getting out of hand.
The first step to restoring the credibility of Nominet is not to fall prey to tabloid nonsense about non-issues!

Let's deal with that one step at a time. There is no story in the press? I don't agree, it's all over the papers. There's no story here? There should be. Some of Nominet's dangerous critics are starting to become active. John Carr, who has some of the biggest contacts in government and knows the Nominet top brass has decided to go public. Why?

Nominet may not have a porn names scandal if you dig into it, but it certainly reads like it does in the press. My 80 year old father-in-law read about it and said it was all over the papers - shock horror.

Personally, it doesn't feel nice pointing the finger at this company, but people are getting frustrated Edwin. I am campaigning for the government to address real corporate governance issues at the heart of Nominet because the members, the real regulators of Nominet are now a total number of 17, and do not seem to give two hoots about its governance issues.

I am not falling prey to tabloid nonsense - I have expressed no personal view about the porn industry here, but I think the public, and Ed Vaizey and Go Daddy are very sensitive to the media. In fact, I think that is all they care about. What do you think would be the best way for Nominet to restore its credibility?

 

[Lucien Taylor]

So essentially the link between the Mail article and the "dreadful corporate governance" of Nominet is that you think Nominet should be answering back better?

Please pick one problem that I stand a chance of helping sorting out and I'll have a go.

Paul, my point is in my post above. To summarise, Nominet is captured, small businesses and domainers are about to get stuffed, and powerful stakeholders are starting to become active and wind up the government, who should be concerned about a number of issues, not just those that make news headlines. To quote Paul Keating at the AGM, there is a break down in trust between this side of the room and that side of the room.

I share your sense of hopelessness Paul, and with that alone, they've won. I believe that there are many things that you can do to help with this situation for example, write to your MP, write to the top 17? I have done just that this morning, and together with your letters I think that would make a difference.

 

[Blossom]

I'm with Edwin on this.

This is a non-issue that has nothing to do with the direct.uk debate, and trying to link the two together strikes me as a bit petty. It dilutes the credibility, intelligence and professionalism that a lot of people have displayed to the actual real direct.uk debate and issues here.

Every time I look on Acorn there's another post trying to drag the subject out more and link it to yet another watered-down peripheral (and distracting) issue. I doubt many (any) people share the same opinion as me, but I feel like it's getting dragged out to ludicrous levels now and I'm getting very bored of it. I realise I'm adding fuel to the fire by saying that, and yes I know I can start/respond to threads that aren't about this, but it's becoming a parody of itself.

 

[Edwin]

I am not falling prey to tabloid nonsense - I have expressed no personal view about the porn industry here, but I think the public, and Ed Vaizey and Go Daddy are very sensitive to the media. In fact, I think that is all they care about. What do you think would be the best way for Nominet to restore its credibility?

Wait for the news cycle to die down. It always does.

Nominet haven't done anything wrong. Their policies aren't magically pornography-friendly - you can use a UK namespace name for adult content just as you can a TLD such as .com, or the vast majority of major cctlds. Once the discussion moves out of the knee-jerk tabloid arena, facts rear their ugly head and at that point Nominet's in the clear.

 

[Edwin]

I'm with Edwin on this.

This is a non-issue that has nothing to do with the direct.uk debate, and trying to link the two together strikes me as a bit petty. It dilutes the credibility, intelligent and professionalism that a lot of people have displayed to the actual real direct.uk debate and issues here.

Every time I look on Acorn there's another post trying to drag the subject out more and link it to yet another watered-down periphery and distracting issue. I doubt many (any) people share the same opinion as me, but I feel like it's getting dragged out to ludicrous levels now and I'm getting very bored of it. I realise I'm adding fuel to the fire by saying that, and yes I know I can start/respond to threads that aren't about this, but it's becoming a parody of itself.

Agree 100%.

 

[GreyWing]

Remember the domainers taking over Nominet? We all knew it was a nonsense and a "non issue" as well. It allowed Nominet to bring in the Government and make changes to the company.....

Still think it is a non issue just because it is nonsense?

 

[Brassneck]

Agree 100%.

Me too. I don't know about nominet but I feel as if Acorn has been captured by certain members here.

 

[DarrenTSO]

How can we bang the heads of the top 17, and get them to consult with us, the wider membership to resolve Nominet's problems? To attend fewer dinners laid on for the elite, and more round tables? To work with their fellow owners? To self-regulate?

I think you have to be careful with grouping people together like that, as if we (I can say that now we are around ~17th in the UK) think and act like one homogeneous unit. It might surprise you, but there are a massive range of opinions on Nominet, .uk, and domains and the internet in general. Businesses are after all run by people, and like people, businesses are all different. Despite increased consolidation in recent years, the UK domain and hosting industry is still incredibly competitive so I think it's a mistake to consider that what one domain registrar wants, so does another, just because they are of a similar size.

Whilst we happen to have a lot of domain names on our tag, we are primarily a hosting provider and once you factor in transaction fees etc we practically sell domains at cost so selling more domains to us isn't something that directly boosts our bottom line. My personal position has always been that providing the release mechanism for .uk protects existing holders.

I've attended several roundtable events and listened very intently to a range of views - some are for .uk, some are absolutely against it under no circumstances ever, but most are in the middle I've found. Most people aren't to be found at the extremes and there is common ground between all sides that can be found on many issues I'm sure.

 

[Lucien Taylor]

I'm with Edwin on this.

This is a non-issue that has nothing to do with the direct.uk debate, and trying to link the two together strikes me as a bit petty. It dilutes the credibility, intelligent and professionalism that a lot of people have displayed to the actual real direct.uk debate and issues here.

Every time I look on Acorn there's another post trying to drag the subject out more and link it to yet another watered-down periphery and distracting issue. I doubt many (any) people share the same opinion as me, but I feel like it's getting dragged out to ludicrous levels now and I'm getting very bored of it. I realise I'm adding fuel to the fire by saying that, and yes I know I can start/respond to threads that aren't about this, but it's becoming a parody of itself.

Sorry, this thread isn't about the direct.uk debate, and nor is that the only issue worth talking about to do with Nominet. I do not agree that this is peripheral to the real debate. I think the direct.uk debate, which I do care about and have attended two round-tables about is one of many issues emanating from problems at the top. Solve the problems at the top, run proper open consultations, and the direct.uk issue will be better resolved. If we continue to over-focus on the minutiae of the direct.uk debate, we ignore the amendments to the registrar agreement (which will have a huge impact upon our lives and jobs), the breaches of directors' duties, the legal action action against members, and now, the activism of key stakeholders who are registering their unhappiness with the government. Everything I was taught at business school about good business practice demands good corporate governance.

 

[Lucien Taylor]

Me too. I don't know about nominet but I feel as if Acorn has been captured by certain members here.

LOL, I can assure you that I have absolutely no power or influence in this forum. I don't expect people to give a toss about what I think, this just seems to be the kind of place for people to air their views. I just think it is dangerous to over-focus on the direct.uk debate. If that upsets anybody I'll take this discussion off Acorn.

 

[Lucien Taylor]

I think you have to be careful with grouping people together like that, as if we (I can say that now we are around ~17th in the UK) think and act like one homogeneous unit. It might surprise you, but there are a massive range of opinions on Nominet, .uk, and domains and the internet in general.

Agree. And agree.
That is why I am trying to talk to the top 17, the ones who bucked the trend of the wider membership, ie. held a clearly different voting pattern to the rest of the membership, and failed to engage in any of the debates, or seemed willing to discuss any issues (sorry if I missed you at both direct.uk round-tables that I attended or the Registrar debate). Do you think you could use your voting power and influence to gain a meeting with the top members, to present the issues, the evidence, and to argue the case. They/you after all are the real power-brokers of this company. Please message me if you'd like to help or discuss this further.

 

[GreyWing]

Guys I really think you are missing the importance of it all, got to look at the bigger picture. Forget all the stuff about porn. The fact is here that Ed Vaziey has said to us privately (Lucien and Myself) and my MP that he has zero power to stop things like .uk because Nominet is a private company.

Now he seems to have jumped on the bandwagon over porn and said that Nominet has this duty to the Public, basically agreeing with what Lucien and Myself have been saying to him for nearly a year, basically get off your backside and do something.

So now when you go to him about .uk and he says nowt to do with me guys, any of us can pull out that statement of his and say well it kind of is because you said it was your problem when it was porn on .uk

What I'm saying is that the Minister is aware of a lot more than what is posted on here, I can assure you of that. Is the porn thing being used as a pretext for the Minister to get involved? I don't know, would they get involved in a good way or bad? I don't know. But I do know that the Minister isn't politically stupid and would only have said such a thing if something was going on.

 

[GreyWing]

It's an entirely fabricated storm in a tabloid teacup.

Exactly what Lucien and myself are saying, who fabricated it and what they trying to achieve by fabricating it?

 

[Edwin]

Sorry, this thread isn't about the direct.uk debate, and nor is that the only issue worth talking about to do with Nominet.

You're the one who connected it in your opening post! I'm just going with the flow...

 

[Edwin]

Exactly what Lucien and myself are saying, who fabricated it and what they trying to achieve by fabricating it?

Daily Mail? More clicks and ad impressions? Their readership seems to love getting "outraged" when reality fails to align itself with their collective narrow worldview.

I very much doubt those who set this story hare running actually have any interest at all in effecting real change. They just want to kick up a big stink and get people coming back to read updates and mouthe off about it!