Court case on membership fees – update

adm

helpful admin
Staff member
Joined
Jul 7, 2024
Posts
21
Reaction score
24
Trophy points
3
Dear Members,

Welcome to the July operational update. As ever, it has been a busy quarter here at Nominet. I wanted to take this opportunity to share information and progress on a number of fronts.

.UK POLICY

Registry modernisation consultation
Last week we published the feedback from the consultation on registry modernisation proposals. While the team are pleased that the direction of travel was well received by many of you, we know there are also possible improvements we can make, including some relating to the proposed lifecycle and inter-registrar transfer process as well as the operational rollout which would benefit from further consideration.

We are taking the summer to work on the finer details and to refine both the engagement and deployment plans. We will ensure we give registrars plenty of time to make any changes that require development work. Expect more details and a timeline in September. In the meantime, thanks to those of you who contributed and to the UKRAC for their input into this work.

BUSINESS UPDATES

[td]Gov.uk
We have now officially taken over the management of gov.uk, having successfully secured the contract for this work last year. A lot of work went on behind the scenes, as you can imagine, to ensure a smooth transition over to Nominet last month, including over 150,000 lines of code written or changed. We are delighted to be supporting around 3854 important government domains. This is a seven-year contract, worth £1.4m.

PDNS
Our work on the UK government’s PDNS is now in the closing stages: we are continuing to offer this service until September. Meanwhile, our work with Australian government continues. Both services continue to perform a valuable function protecting public services at a time of heightened cyber threat.

EBERO
Nominet is one of a few Emergency Backend Registry Operators selected by ICANN to help in the event of a failure of a generic top-level domain. Our team was called upon to provide support for the .nowruz gTLD, and we expect the transition will get underway this week. While the numbers of domains involved are small, I am pleased that ICANN again chose Nominet to provide assistance to ensure a continuity of service.

INVESTING IN OUR TECHNOLOGY


We are pleased to report that our work to update our infrastructure platforms across on-premises and the public cloud is reaching its conclusion. Our Enterprise platform which was started under the TTP programme is now in final testing, with business application migrations including the Registry itself starting after the summer. We have also designed and built a new Edge infrastructure platform that will be used to host our DNS services in the UK and internationally. The Edge platform is highly distributed in order to deliver an excellent quality of service at low latency.

For public cloud, we have completed a new landing zone for application hosting to the latest security standards and have reduced the number of cloud environments we use overall, which will create efficiencies moving forward. From a security perspective we have improved the monitoring software to detect and inform patching of software vulnerabilities as they emerge and are published.


ORGANISATIONAL CHANGES

As I explained in March, we have taken steps to ensure we can operate as effectively as possible now and in the future. We have combined two business units (registry and cyber) into one and reduced our overall headcount. The key driver was to run as effectively as possible as a team moving forward, responding to cost pressures that I am sure members are experiencing in their own businesses.

These things are not easy, and while we were able to reduce the number of potential redundancies through redeployments, we have said goodbye to 40 colleagues. As you would imagine, it has been an unsettling time for all, and the team are getting used to a new normal. I appreciate the professionalism and contribution to Nominet that those leaving us have made to the organisation.

We have called the combined business unit, led by David Carroll, a customer team to signal our intent to ensure we are focused on making improvements, large and small, to the service we deliver to you, our members, our registry services clients, and our government contracts. As well as ensuring our service is front and centre, David is developing our registry strategy, focused on how .UK meets the challenges of a mature market.

We have also moved a few teams into central functions. Membership engagement and Social Impact will now join the corporate affairs team, working with Elaine Quinn. The legal team will join the CFO team, working with Carolyn Bedford.

While recruitment was on hold pending the restructure consultation, we are now recruiting for roles that we were not able to fill with those at risk, or for roles where the incumbent is moving on to pastures new.

In other team news, I know some of you were kind enough to reach out to wish David Buckle well as he left us after almost three years as our Head of Membership Engagement. It won’t come as a surprise that this remains a key role and we aim to fill that vacancy as soon as we can.


USING TECHNOLOGY TO CHANGE LIVES


Micro:bits in primary schools
[/td]
[td]
Microbit Ivy Chimney School-92
[/td]
[td]One of Nominet’s flagship social impact programmes is a partnership with BBC Education and the Micro:bit Educational Foundation to introduce primary school children to digital skills and coding at an early age. Kits have been delivered to over 90% of primary schools in the UK, and we’re now helping make sure teachers have the training and resources to develop applications in line with the curriculum.

If you have a couple of minutes, you can see how a primary school in Essex is is getting involved.

Deterring online child sexual abuse
Earlier this year, two of our grantees –the Internet Watch Foundation and Lucy Faithfull – shared evidence showing their innovative chatbot has stopped millions of people from searching for child sexual abuse videos. Nominet is funding the continuation of their pioneering research and experimentation as part of 'Project Intercept’.

Net UK
We have also looked at where we can support the wider internet community. Along with LINX and LONAP, Nominet is co-sponsoring the inaugural NetUK conference at IET London which gets underway today. The event is aimed at anyone working in Internet operations and the peering community and will provide a space for participants to share best practices and knowledge, not least with those joining the industry for the first time.

Court case on membership fees – update
In my last update I shared an update on a legal case that was filed against Nominet by a member seeking a refund of membership fees.

The issue of a default judgment (when Nominet was unaware of the details of the claim and unable to defend itself) has now been definitively settled. The default judgment was set aside by the Court in January this year. It was then subsequently challenged unsuccessfully by the claimant at appeal on two occasions, with the last hearing on 14th June.

Unless dropped by the claimant, the case will be heard in court. We'd prefer of course to avoid the time and costs of this course of action, particularly as we are confident that the membership fees paid by members are lawful.

Legislative update
Following the general election, Peter Kyle MP has been appointed Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology. Sir Chris Bryant MP is now Minister of State in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

It’s worth highlighting the fate of two pieces of legislation that were on the previous government’s agenda at the time the election was called.

The first was the Criminal Justice Bill, which included a new power for law enforcement to suspend domain names being used for criminal purposes by court order. The Bill only reached Report Stage in the House of Commons, and therefore was not finalised in the parliamentary ‘wash-up’ process.

The second was an amendment to Section 19 of the Digital Economy Act 2020, on which the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology was due to set out – in secondary legislation - a list of misuses and unfair uses of domain names on which registries must act and arrangements for dealing with complaints for domain names.

It will be for the incoming government to decide how they want to proceed with both these pieces of parliamentary business going forward. To keep up to date on public policy matters, you can sign up to the ‘Policy Matters’ briefing by submitting this form.

A Country Code registry coalition
The next two years are crucial for global Internet governance – with new UN processes on the horizon. The first is the Global Digital Compact, set to be agreed in September, and will act as a roadmap for the future governance of the Internet and digital technologies. Second, is the 20-year review of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) which will culminate in 2025 and entail a decision on the future mandate of the UN’s Internet Governance Forum.

To help shape the development of outputs from these processes, Nominet co-founded a techincal community coalition with auDA, CIRA and InternetNZ in April. This group enables us to come together and share insights and formulate joint positions, with the aim of defending, evolving and strengthening this collaborative approach in decision-making about the Internet.

This work is important in protecting Nominet’s vision of a free, open and interoperable global Internet, which we continue to champion.

As ever, a lot of ground to cover. Looking forward to seeing those of you signed up for the next Members call tomorrow (9th July). You can register for the call here.
[/td]
Paul_Fletcher_roundal_3
 
Court case on membership fees – update
In my last update I shared an update on a legal case that was filed against Nominet by a member seeking a refund of membership fees.

The issue of a default judgment (when Nominet was unaware of the details of the claim and unable to defend itself) has now been definitively settled. The default judgment was set aside by the Court in January this year. It was then subsequently challenged unsuccessfully by the claimant at appeal on two occasions, with the last hearing on 14th June.

Unless dropped by the claimant, the case will be heard in court. We'd prefer of course to avoid the time and costs of this course of action, particularly as we are confident that the membership fees paid by members are lawful.

Wasn't looking to get a free ride from Nominet on that front.. but anyways was interesting to see how it develops.
 
Wasn't looking to get a free ride from Nominet on that front.. but anyways was interesting to see how it develops.

The arguments surrounding this issue are quite technical, and I've found myself on both sides of the fence at times. In my opinion, both sides have valid points, but they also both have potential weaknesses. Ultimately, though, I think the claimant will not be successful.

Even if he wins the first round, I’m certain that Nominet will appeal the decision repeatedly. This could result in the case going all the way to the highest courts, potentially setting new legal precedents. Nominet can't afford to lose this battle because a loss would mean governance chaos in the company, and in a critical part of national infrastructure. They will spend everything they have to avoid a loss, if Nominet lose, it's not far fetched that the government might step in at the end to ensure stability. They won't lose without throwing the kitchen sink at it, and they have £50m of Kitchen sinks to throw.

If we were in his position, those sorts of costs would bankrupt almost every one of us if it went wrong, .Even if he wins, the costs could bankrupt most of us, and yes, winning does cost a small fortune.

I would still encourage him to communicate directly with Nominet (without prejudice) and try to resolve the issue. I'm sure Nominet would be open to it. I assume they know that if they run up huge costs, at some point the other party won't be able to repay it anyway, even if he wanted to. I don't know the chap's financial position, but I can imagine what these costs would do to me as an average bloke.

I'd say don't be a martyr for this. It's not worth your money, your time, or your health.
 
Last edited:
The thread title could be worth a change to note "Court case on membership fees – update " as think most will skip / miss that!
 
The arguments surrounding this issue are quite technical, and I've found myself on both sides of the fence at times. In my opinion, both sides have valid points, but they also both have potential weaknesses. Ultimately, though, I think the claimant will not be successful.

Even if he wins the first round, I’m certain that Nominet will appeal the decision repeatedly. This could result in the case going all the way to the highest courts, potentially setting new legal precedents. Nominet can't afford to lose this battle because a loss would mean governance chaos in the company, and in a critical part of national infrastructure. They will spend everything they have to avoid a loss, if Nominet lose, it's not far fetched that the government might step in at the end to ensure stability. They won't lose without throwing the kitchen sink at it, and they have £50m of Kitchen sinks to throw.

If we were in his position, those sorts of costs would bankrupt almost every one of us if it went wrong, .Even if he wins, the costs could bankrupt most of us, and yes, winning does cost a small fortune.

I would still encourage him to communicate directly with Nominet (without prejudice) and try to resolve the issue. I'm sure Nominet would be open to it. I assume they know that if they run up huge costs, at some point the other party won't be able to repay it anyway, even if he wanted to. I don't know the chap's financial position, but I can imagine what these costs would do to me as an average bloke.

I'd say don't be a martyr for this. It's not worth your money, your time, or your health.
Yes it seems like he has lost a fair amount of money its pretty crazy and I know he is crazy....
 
I never really followed this. Is there a link or explanation somewhere about why nominet membership fees are considered unlawful?
 
I never really followed this. Is there a link or explanation somewhere about why nominet membership fees are considered unlawful?
So not to prejudice their positions, I think both sides are very coy about it all at the moment. Which is too be expected to be fair. I doubt they'll post publicly except to things that have already happened, hence Nominet's Statement.

WeightedVoting.uk gives a brief run down of what they believe the issues are.

I could be wrong on this. But from what I read, I think both sides admit that there was/is a problem. It's just one side believes that the time past since the error, makes it lawful. The other believes that that isn't the case, and they are still unlawful. I believe that if the issue being raised now, was raised in 2007-8'ish, then the claimant would probably have won their claim.

The Claimant is only claiming £1000'ish, and for that is putting his financial life on the line.
 
So not to prejudice their positions, I think both sides are very coy about it all at the moment. Which is too be expected to be fair. I doubt they'll post publicly except to things that have already happened, hence Nominet's Statement.

WeightedVoting.uk gives a brief run down of what they believe the issues are.

I could be wrong on this. But from what I read, I think both sides admit that there was/is a problem. It's just one side believes that the time past since the error, makes it lawful. The other believes that that isn't the case, and they are still unlawful. I believe that if the issue being raised now, was raised in 2007-8'ish, then the claimant would probably have won their claim.

The Claimant is only claiming £1000'ish, and for that is putting his financial life on the line.
Complete madness should of quit a long time ago now he is racking up legal fees which will in the end hurt
 
Ok thanks - yes the information was in the Supplementary Opinion at weightedvoting. So the basics appear to be that Nominet set subscription fees until August 1997. After that they said they would have bye-laws to establish new subscription rates by consulting with the members. They never did. Interesting. As Sam said though I think this is an odd choice for a hill to die on considering the costs compared to the amount of gain.
 
Ok thanks - yes the information was in the Supplementary Opinion at weightedvoting. So the basics appear to be that Nominet set subscription fees until August 1997. After that they said they would have bye-laws to establish new subscription rates by consulting with the members. They never did. Interesting.
It would be that much of a mess if the Claimant won, that I think the Government would step in and take it away from members.

For example, they'd have to undo everything they've changed since 2007, board seats, Governance etc. It's a critical piece of National infrastructure, they aren't going to mess about waiting for 12 months whilst members work out who is in-charge and really running the shop.

I think the Chair has already said, he wouldn't be in charge if the rules were unlawful, so how can he navigate the company to fix this. It's a fair point.
 
Ok thanks - yes the information was in the Supplementary Opinion at weightedvoting. So the basics appear to be that Nominet set subscription fees until August 1997. After that they said they would have bye-laws to establish new subscription rates by consulting with the members. They never did. Interesting. As Sam said though I think this is an odd choice for a hill to die on considering the costs compared to the amount of gain.
But Jim has some personal scores to settle with Nominet (the way they dropped him as a candidate), so it explains the battle.
 
But Jim has some personal scores to settle with Nominet (the way they dropped him as a candidate), so it explains the battle
If I'm not wrong, and I don't follow it much, the last I heard Jim was involved in his own legal battles with Nominet in a London Court. I've no idea what stage it is at, or if it is even still ongoing. Nominet haven't mentioned it recently so I don't know.

Balls of steel badge to whoever takes Nominet's deep pockets on in Court though
 
Back
Top