Is eNom a serial speech suppressor? [WAS: A Wave of the Watch List, and Speech Disappears]

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

________________________________________
From: Paul Levy [plevy () citizen org]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 2:09 PM
To: David Farber; ip
Subject: Is eNom a serial speech suppressor?  [WAS:  A Wave of the Watch List, and Speech Disappears]

eNom seems to be in the category of Dynadot, an easy pushover.

It appears that someone sent eNom a copy of the injunctions issued in the Wikileaks case and told it that because of 
those injuntions they needed to shut down wikileaks.info, even though nothing on the face of either the permanent 
injunction or the TRO purported to require that any domain name other than wikileaks.org be turned off.  A Wikileaks 
activist contacted eNom and asked why the name had been turned off, and whether the Bank's lawyers had threatened to 
take action against eNom in order to get it to turn off the domain name, but eNom has refused to respond.  The complete 
correspondence follows.

The key language, in the email from Christine Radocha:

 the WIKILEAKS.INFO domain was placed on registrar hold in compliance with a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). This 
TRO required eNom, Inc. to place the WIKILEAKS.INFO domain on registrar hold due to certain "JB Property" that appeared 
on the http://www.wikileaks.info website

It would be interesting to see whether eNom is willing to respond publicly to this criticism.  Should Internet users 
stay away from eNom the way we now know they need to stay away from Dynadot?

----- Forwarded message from Christina Radocha <Christina.Radocha () enom com> -----

From: Christina Radocha <Christina.Radocha () enom com>
To: Jay Lim <press () wikileaks org>
CC: Sarah Cooper <sarah () demandmedia com>, Carolyn Mitchell
        <Carolyn.Mitchell () enom com>, Christina Radocha <Christina.Radocha () enom com>
Subject: RE: URGENT 'wikileaks.info' seizure
Date: Wed,  5 Mar 2008 20:31:30 +0000 (GMT)


Dear Mr. Lim,

Thank you very much for forwarding the link to the Order Denying the Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction. 
This is the first time eNom received any copy or notification of this Court order. eNom will immediately comply and 
lift the registrar hold from WIKILEAKS.INFO that was placed on this domain due to the Temporary Restraining Order 
which, per the new order, is no longer in effect.

Again, thank you for sending this document to my attention. Please let me know if you have further questions.

Best regards,

Christina Radocha
Corporate Counsel
eNom, Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jay Lim [mailto:press () wikileaks org]
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 11:19 AM
To: Christina Radocha
Cc: press () wikileaks org; Sarah Cooper; Carolyn Mitchell
Subject: Re: URGENT 'wikileaks.info' seizure

Dear Ms. Radocha,

Please see http://www.citmedialaw.org/threats/julius-baer-bank-and-trust-v-wikileaks
in particular the order of the 29th of February disolving the TRO

http://www.citmedialaw.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-02-29-Order%20Denying%20Motion%20For%20Preliminary%20Injunction;%20Dissolving%20Permanent%20Injunction;%20and%20Setting%20Briefing%20and%20Hearing%20Schedule.pdf

We are aware that Lavely & Singer, Bank Julius Baer & Trusts lawyers have been abusing process. I ask you again for 
information on who sent you the order(s) and what claims or demands were made in relation to them. I ask you for a copy 
of the demands or claims should they exist. If we do not receive this information we must assume that eNom acted out of 
its own initiative and is hence complicit in not only assuming the TRO applied to eNom, but not restoring the domain 
when the order was rescinded on the 29th of February. We will goto press with what we have.

On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 06:59:00PM +0000, Christina Radocha wrote:
> Dear Mr. Lim,
>
> On February 28th, 2008, the WIKILEAKS.INFO domain was placed on registrar hold in compliance with a Temporary 
> Restraining Order (TRO). This TRO required eNom, Inc. to place the WIKILEAKS.INFO domain on registrar hold due to 
> certain "JB Property" that appeared on the http://www.wikileaks.info website. This TRO was issued by the Honorable 
> Jeffery S. White of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case No. CV08-0824 
> JSW). As you may be aware, eNom is required to comply with such orders.  I am more than happy to forward a copy of 
> the Temporary Restraining Order to you if necessary.
>
> As of today, eNom has not received any documents that pertain to the expiration of this TRO, nor has it received any 
> documents regarding a preliminary injunction. If you have any documents that pertain to the release of this domain or 
> the expiration of the TRO, please forward them to me as soon as possible so that eNom can proceed accordingly. eNom 
> certainly wants to comply with any Court issued order in this case, but we have not received any such documents other 
> that the Temporary Restraining Order.
>
> Please send any documents requiring eNom to release the WIKILEAKS.INFO domain to me as soon as you can. If required, 
> eNom will release the registrar hold on this domain as soon it receives such documents compelling it to do so.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Christina Radocha
> Corporate Counsel
> eNom, Inc.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jay Lim <press () wikileaks org>
> To: Carolyn Mitchell
> Cc: Sarah Cooper; 'press () wikileaks org' <press () wikileaks org>; Steve Brown; Laurie Krick
> Sent: Tue Mar 04 21:20:51 2008
> Subject: Re: URGENT 'wikileaks.info' seizure
>
> Please immediately provide the date and court of this order and in particular how eNom came to receive it and in 
> particular what claims or demands were made by the senders in relation to it. We are not aware of any such order 
> applying to eNom. An order in relation to Dynadot, which has been the subject of several hundred press reports, was 
> overturned on February 29, 2008. If eNom was asked to act on this latter order, then this is an abuse of process 
> which we will likely persue.
>
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 05:07:38AM +0000, Carolyn Mitchell wrote:
> > This was a court order I worked with christina on. The order is pinned up imn my cube. Christina has details we 
> > called the attorney the other day.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Sarah Cooper
> > To: 'press () wikileaks org' <press () wikileaks org>
> > Cc: Steve Brown; Laurie Krick; Carolyn Mitchell
> > Sent: Tue Mar 04 19:17:59 2008
> > Subject: Re: URGENT 'wikileaks.info' seizure
> >
> > Jay,
> > I am in receipt of your email. I will look into this situation as soon as possible. Please let me know who you 
> > contacted at eNom.
> >
> > I will contact you first thing tomorrow.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Sarah Akhtar Cooper
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Jay Lim <press () wikileaks org>
> > To: Sarah Cooper; Sarah Cooper; akhtar () enom com <akhtar () enom com>; akhtar () demandmedia com <akhtar () 
> > demandmedia com>; sakhtar () enom com <sakhtar () enom com>; sakhtar () demandmedia com <sakhtar () demandmedia com>
> > Sent: Tue Mar 04 19:46:40 2008
> > Subject: URGENT 'wikileaks.info' seizure
> >
> >
> > TAKE NOTICE
> >
> > Concerning the apparently unlawful seizure of 'wikileaks.info' by eNom.
> >
> > eNom has not responded to enquiries first made on Feb 29 2008 to its Feb 28 2008 seizure of 'wikileaks.info'. We 
> > must assume this seizure is UNLAWFUL.
> >
> > eNom has 24 hours to explain itself in full before Wikileaks issues a press release about the seizure and considers 
> > other measures. The release is likely to call for a mass boycott of eNom.
> >
> > You tread on dangerous ground. Act accordingly.
> >
> > Jay Lim.

----- End forwarded message -----
> > > David Farber <dave () farber net> 3/6/2008 9:56 AM >>>

________________________________________
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen [arnt () oryx com] On Behalf Of Arnt Gulbrandsen [arnt () gulbrandsen priv no]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:12 AM
To: cdel () firsthand net
Cc: David Farber
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: A Wave of the Watch List, and Speech Disappears

> From: Christian de Larrinaga [cdel () firsthand net]
>
> Can anybody enlighten us if ENOM have just refused to host as the DNS
> provider the DNS records for these domains or whether they have
> actually suspended (unglued) the domains in question (i.e., the owner
> cannot even move the authoritative DNS for the zones to a more
> willing provider?

The latter.

$ whois cuba-hemingway.com
...

    Domain Name: CUBA-HEMINGWAY.COM
    Registrar: ENOM, INC.
    Whois Server: whois.enom.com
    Referral URL: http://www.enom.com
    Name Server: NS1.DIGITALPANORAMA.NET
    Name Server: NS2.DIGITALPANORAMA.NET
    Status: clientDeleteProhibited
    Status: clientHold
    Status: clientTransferProhibited
    Updated Date: 03-oct-2007
    Creation Date: 14-jul-2000
    Expiration Date: 14-jul-2008

The Status lines are the important ones.

Arnt

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Paul Alan Levy
Public Citizen Litigation Group
1600 - 20th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009
(202) 588-1000
http://www.citizen.org/litigation

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com