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

["James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

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<mailto:psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Monday, April 13, 2015 at 12:45
To: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, James Bladel 
<jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: Volker Greimann 
<vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, 
"jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>, GNSO Council List 
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto: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> 
[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<mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 10:28
To: "jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>, GNSO Council List 
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto: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<mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net/> / 
www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.rrpproxy.net/>www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com/>
 / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.brandshelter.com/>



Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>



Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin

Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534



Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://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<mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net/> / 
www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.rrpproxy.net/>www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com/>
 / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.brandshelter.com/>



Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.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<http://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<http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2015.0.5856 / Virus Database: 4328/9503 - Release Date: 04/10/15