Re: [council] Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS

[Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Phil,

Apart from the question by James, I would be grateful for any further insight 
you may have into this issue when you publish the article. Please do share a 
link to your article on this list when it is ready.

Thanks.

Amr

On Apr 14, 2015, at 2:16 AM, James M. Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> HI Phil:
> 
> How could the “same concerns” have been raised in March 2014?  Wasn’t this 
> primarily an objection to the TLD’s Sunrise pricing practices?  Meaning, if 
> sunrise prices had been closer to the GA wholesale price, would there have 
> even been an IPC letter?
> 
> Thanks—
> 
> J.
> 
> 
> From: Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Monday, April 13, 2015 at 12:45 
> To: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>, James Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Volker Greimann <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx" 
> <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: [council] Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to 
> ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS
> 
> I will soon be publishing an extensive article on this matter.
>  
> For now I would point out that, regardless of the timing of the IPC letter, 
> ICANN received a letter from Sen. Jay Rockefeller, then-Chairman of the US 
> Senate Commerce Committee, raising essentially the same concerns in March 
> 2014.
>  
> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
> Virtualaw LLC
> 1155 F Street, NW
> Suite 1050
> Washington, DC 20004
> 202-559-8597/Direct
> 202-559-8750/Fax
> 202-255-6172/cell
>  
> Twitter: @VlawDC
>  
> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
>  
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Amr Elsadr
> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 6:52 AM
> To: James M. Bladel
> Cc: Volker Greimann; jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [council] Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to 
> ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS
>  
> Hi,
>  
> Apologies for coming back to this thread so late, but just wanted to voice my 
> support of the perspectives offered by Volker and James. As this gTLD has 
> already been delegated, and unless there is any reason to believe the 
> registry is not in compliance with its Registry Agreement, I don’t see why 
> ICANN staff would be required or mandated to freeze the launch of .SUCKS.
>  
> One part of the blog by Allen Grogen caught my attention, and I probably need 
> to look into this a bit more closely before opining:
>  
> “…, if Vox Populi is not complying with all applicable laws, it may also be 
> in breach of its registry agreement. ICANN could then act consistently with 
> its public interest goals and consumer and business protections to change 
> these practices through our contractual relationship with the registry.”
>  
> Personally speaking, although I understand the concerns raised by the IPC, 
> I’m not convinced that there is necessarily any malicious intent on the part 
> of Vox Populi. Like Volker said, I agree that this is an interesting business 
> model. Just not entirely sure its actual objective is to extort trademark 
> holders. If the IPC would like to suggest initiation of a policy process to 
> somehow address this, that would be its prerogative. Additionally, should 
> ICANN compliance staff determine that there indeed is a contractual issue 
> ICANN needs to resolve, I would recommend that a discussion about this be 
> held with the GNSO to clarify the reasoning.
>  
> Thanks.
>  
> Amr
>  
> On Apr 1, 2015, at 6:12 PM, James M. Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> 
> Agree with Volker.  
>  
> This TLD has attracted quite a bit of (negative, and perhaps deservedly so) 
> attention recently, but I am confused by this letter.  The window to take 
> action was likely prior to delegation.  Once the TLD is delegated and the 
> contract is signed, I don’t see ICANN Staff having the authority to do 
> anything to “halt” the launch.  Probably why they didn’t….
>  
> Thanks—
>  
> J.
>  
> From: Volker Greimann <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 10:28 
> To: "jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, GNSO Council List 
> <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [council] FW: Intellectual Property Constituency Communication 
> to ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS
>  
> Interesting business model, but not really an issue for the GNSO, unless 
> someone is proposing to take this as a basis for new policy development. 
> As an observer with no skin in this game, this looks to be an issue for 
> compliance to determine if the model violates the policies and/or contracts 
> or not and if it does, to take action accordingly. 
> 
> For the interesting question of the different fee structure, there seems to 
> be an explanation already:
> http://domainincite.com/18282-that-mystery-1-million-sucks-fee-explained-and-its-probably-not-what-you-thought
> 
> Best,
> 
> VG 
> 
> Am 01.04.2015 um 11:49 schrieb Jonathan Robinson:
> All.
>  
> FYI.
>  
> Jonathan
>  
> From: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: 27 March 2015 20:45
> To: Jonathan Robinson
> Subject: Fwd: Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to ICANN 
> Regarding dotSUCKS
>  
> Dear Jonathan,
>  
> It was ​a pleasure working with you in Istanbul.  
>  
> In your role as Chair of the ​GNSO, I am sending you a copy of the attached 
> letter, just sent to ICANN, expressing the concerns of the Intellectual 
> Property Constituency regarding the .SUCKS registry.
>  
> Best Regards,
> ​
> Greg​
>  
>  
> Greg​ory S.​Shatan
> President, Intellectual Property Constituency
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> -- 
> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
>  
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>  
> Volker A. Greimann
> - Rechtsabteilung -
>  
> Key-Systems GmbH
> Im Oberen Werk 1
> 66386 St. Ingbert
> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>  
> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.netwww.domaindiscount24.com / 
> www.BrandShelter.com
>  
> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystemswww.twitter.com/key_systems
>  
> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken 
> Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
>  
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> www.keydrive.lu 
>  
> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen 
> Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder 
> Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese 
> Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per 
> E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
>  
> --------------------------------------------
>  
> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
>  
> Best regards,
>  
> Volker A. Greimann
> - legal department -
>  
> Key-Systems GmbH
> Im Oberen Werk 1
> 66386 St. Ingbert
> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>  
> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.netwww.domaindiscount24.com / 
> www.BrandShelter.com
>  
> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystemswww.twitter.com/key_systems
>  
> CEO: Alexander Siffrin
> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken 
> V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>  
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> www.keydrive.lu 
>  
> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is 
> addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this 
> email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an 
> addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify 
> the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2015.0.5856 / Virus Database: 4328/9503 - Release Date: 04/10/15