TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to John Smith writing about the article posted here on Gary Kremens (
formatting link
) :
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if 'Mandy Howard' of Parents
>> United is any relation to 'Nancy Howard' who submitted this article?
>> I would also like to point out that in this somewhat offensive article
>> (to me, at least), neither of the Misses Howard's is entitled to use
>> absolute terms like 'predator' or 'should be incarcerated for life',
>> certainly without _an adjudication in a court_. My first reaction was
>> to pitch the article out unused, but with the possibility there is
>> some smidgen of truth herein, i.e. Kremen _was_ arrested on the
>> allegations named, and his known legal problems with the 'sex.com'
>> domain, etc I decided to use the article. ....PAT]
> No reputable psychotherapist would blur the distinction between gays
> and pedophiles, much less try to make an outright connection. This is
> just hate-group propaganda, piggybacking on what might otherwise be an
> actual news story.
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for saying that ... out of
> curiosity, I went to look at the
formatting link
site last night for
> the first time in my life, to see what apparently makes it such a
> famous and popular site, and to find out what would make it worth
> fighting over, as Kremen did with that fellow who apparently tried
> to cybersquat on it (remember the fellow who snatched the name, got
> sued, and the registrar wound up getting sued also, and the lawyer
> who was going to get a piece of the action as his fee in the case?)
> I _thought_ I was going to see something really amazing, etc. Well,
> all I wound up seeing was a sort of poorly designed web site with a
> jillion links to other sites on it, all of which wanted your credit
> card number, etc. Over all, it was sort of boring, with slow
> responding links, etc. (Of course my computer is not the fastest,
> and to be charitable, maybe the links were so slow loading because
> of the millions of web users trying to get in and supply their credit
> card numbers, etc, but I don't think so. Of course, I did not feel
> very well last either, but it is hard for me to imagine some lawyer
> agreeing to settle for _fifteen percent_ of the action on that site
> in exchange for his fee, then suing the client to get that little dab
> of (what appeared to me to be) nothing special. I understand the
> registrar who got sued in that thing settled for $150 thousand. Damn!
> Is _any_ web site worth that kind of money? How and why? Would
> someone like to hijack
formatting link
from me? I'd be
> glad to let you do it, if there was any possibility I could 'settle
> out of court -- or in court, for that matter -- for $150 thousand from
> the transgressor. Geeze ... PAT]
Gary Kremens says:
1) Completely fake news article 2) See
formatting link
Settlement with Versign is confidential -- see
formatting link
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In (1) above, I presume Ms. Howard took an _existing_ true report of sex.com legal problems as dealt with in great length in the various files reached by looking at the URL mentioned in (2) and (3) and embellished it with the central points of her "news item", i.e. a pedophile situation and heroin use. Gary Kremens does not say if he knows who Ms. Howard is, or what her possible motivation was in further smearing his name around. I cannot imagine she just made the whole thing up out of whole cloth ... he must have some knowledge of _who_ she is and _why_ she chose to submit the report. But I am not going to dwell on it unless Mr. Kremens wishes to elaborate further. I will say those things are always _nasty_ allegations to make about anyone, given the general dislike of many in society for those things. I did go through (2) and (3) above in some detail, and it appears to me this is not something recently started, but rather, it has been going on for about ten years, or since the production of a letter to the registrar from Mr. Cohen in
1995 which Mr. Kamens says is fraudulent. Warning: some of the legal documents shown in (2) above are very long, complex and boring, and there are a couple of audio files -- over an hour long -- of lawyers in court arguing before a judge on things such as 'who owns which site' and how registrars do their duties, etc. PAT]