<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS
Thanks Phil. So ICANN had an idea of what the Sunrise prices would be a year
ago, and this is indeed important.
Thanks—
J.
From: Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 at 6:52
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
In answer to James, ICANN received a letter from Senate Commerce Committee
Chairman Jay Rockefeller in March 2014 about .Sucks.
Press release is at
http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=b3eb5f23-0b85-49ac-85b2-1b81c3fb0db4&ContentType_id=77eb43da-aa94-497d-a73f-5c951ff72372&Group_id=4b968841-f3e8-49da-a529-7b18e32fd69d&MonthDisplay=3&YearDisplay=2014
Letter text is at
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/rockefeller-to-crocker-12mar14-en.pdf
Excerpt from the letter:
Approving "sucks", a gTLD with little or no public interest value, will have
the effect of undermining the credibility ICANN has slowly been building with
skeptical stakeholders. Three companies - Donuts Inc., Momentous Corporation,
and Top Level Spectrum Inc. -have applied for this gTLD, claiming that it will
foster debate and benefit consumers. I view it as little more than a predatory
shakedown scheme. The business model behind this gTLD seems to be the
following: force large corporations, small businesses, non-profits, and even
individuals, to pay ongoing fees to prevent seeing the phrase "sucks" appended
to their names on the Internet.
… One applicant, for example, Vox Populi Registry, owned by the Canadian
company Momentous, has started soliciting defensive registrations before it has
even secured the right to operate the "sucks" gTLD. According to its website,
the company is accepting payments of $2,500 for trademark reservation, which
will rise to $25,000 during a 30-day sunrise period and remain at that level
annually for trademark owner. Vox Populi claims that the reduced $2,500 fee is
a bargain, saying that "Incurring registration fees of $25,000 in Sunrise is a
waiting game not worth the prize."
While Vox Populi has now reduced the sunrise registration fee to $2500
annually, rather than the $25,000 they stated a year ago, the concerns
expressed by the Senator were pretty much the same as those in the IPC letter.
ICANN did nothing in response last year, yet now has taken the unprecedented
step of asking two national regulators to opine on the legality of the pricing
and business model of the registry. What changed?
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: Amr Elsadr [mailto:aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:30 AM
To: James M. Bladel
Cc: Phil Corwin; Volker Greimann;
jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>;
council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [council] Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to
ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS
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<mailto: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<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
Gregory 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
________________________________
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|