Displaying posts under "Policy & Law"
ICANN GAC concerned about community priority evaluations but not two-letter domain names.
The Governmental Advisory Committee to ICANN has issued its GAC Communique (pdf) from this week’s meeting in Los Angeles.
There are a couple notable items on it related to new top level domain names.
First, the GAC noted apparent inconsistencies with recent Community Priority Evaluations and asked ICANN to consider an appeal process. Based on the language, it appears governments are more concerned about communities losing out than applicants being harmed by a surprise decision in favor of a “community”: Click here to continue reading
A quick visual look at this week’s ICANN meeting in Los Angeles.
It has been a busy, busy week in Los Angeles. I’ll have more thoughts on ICANN 51 later. For now, I have a collection of photos from in and around the event. Captions are below each photo.
Entertainment during TLD Registry (“Dot Chinese Online” and “Dot Chinese Website”) and .Club event on Sunday at a popular Chinese restaurant. I also had a chance to hang out with TLD Registry when it was in Austin last week. I’ve come to the conclusion that TLD Registry and .Club are two of the hardest working registries out there, which might bode well for their long term success. Click here to see the rest of the photos from ICANN 51.
Agent files UDRP to get domain name.
Famous grafitti artist Banksy has filed a cybersquatting complaint against the owner of Banksy.com.
The case was filed by Banksy Inc (C/O Pest Control Office Limited). Pest Control Office is essentially an agent and certification group for Banksy’s work. It is currently trying to get a U.S. trademark for Banksy.
If you go to Banksy.com right now, you’ll find a site about banks: Click here to continue reading…
.Cam and Amazon IDN domain name decisions will be reviewed.
ICANN is giving two new top level domain name applications another look after embarrassing inconsistencies in string confusion objections.
The board’s new TLD committee determined that decisions against Amazon.com’s .通販 application and Rightside’s .cam should be reviewed.
I provide the background to this story in detail here.
In the case of .cam, Verisign succeeded in a string confusion objection against Rightside’s .cam, but failed against two other .cam applicants. The same thing happened when Google, applicant for .car, filed objections against .cars. It won two cases and lost the other. Click to continue reading…
Domain was allegedly registered well before company started using name.
National Arbitration Forum panelist Dennis A. Foster has turned in a UDRP decision in favor of the respondent for the domain name IAFT.com. The case was filed by International Academy of Film and Television (IAFT International LLC), and the case was dead on arrival — at least based on the facts presented in the case.
IAFT claims to have started using IAFT in 2003, three years after the owner of IAFT.com claims to have registered the domain name. Yet it still tried to argue that the domain name was registered in bad faith.
It even made an impossible claim (if the domain was registered by the respondent in 2000) in an additional filing, that “Respondent’ true intent has always been to sell the disputed domain name to Complainant at the highest price possible”.
How could he do this unless we was psychic? Making such a bogus claim in an additional submission seems rather misleading.
I actually question if the respondent registered the domain in 2000 based on historical whois records, but the complainant didn’t seem to challenge this.
According to the domain name owner, IAFT has been trying to buy the domain name from him since 2005 and never mentioned a trademark.
And the complainant says that IAFT.com, while parked, never showed links related to the complainant.
Despite this, the panelist declined to find reverse domain name hijacking. He declined based on the complainant prevailing in two prongs of the UDRP.
I don’t think this should overcome a case so devoid of merit, at least based on the facts that were considered.
IAFT’s lawyer was Charles Carreon. If that name is familiar to you, here’s why.