Domain Name Wire

Domain Name Wire

Displaying posts tagged under "google"

  • Google appears to have sold Hello.com domain name

    1. BY - Apr 07, 2014
    2. Domain Sales
    3. 7 Comments

    Hello.com domain name transferred.

    Hello.comIt appears Google has sold the domain name Hello.com.

    The company used the domain name for a photo sharing service called “Hello” last decade. It later shut down the standalone service and eventually stopped using the domain name.

    Last Friday it looks like Google transferred the domain name. The Hello.com domain name whois record showed a change of registrant from Google to “John Murphy” on April 4. The contact email address changed from Google to jmurphy@hello.com as well.

    Over the weekend the domain name was transferred from brand protection company Mark Monitor to GoDaddy and the domain is now using whois privacy to hide the owner’s identity.

    This is definitely one to watch.

    (Photo from Screenshots.com.)

  • 55 new TLDs request exemption from Registry Code of Conduct

    1. BY - Mar 18, 2014
    2. Policy & Law
    3. 5 Comments

    55 .brand application owners request exemptions.

    Today ICANN posted 55 requests made by new TLD applicants for an exemption from the Registry Code of Conduct.

    The Registry Code of Conduct for new TLDs includes provisions related to showing preference to different registrars, registering domains in the registry’s own right, frontrunning, and control between an owned registry and registrar.

    The 55 requests were made by companies wishing to operate their domains as a brand. Operating a closed .brand would violate some provisions in the code of conduct.

    In order to qualify for an exemption no one other than the applicant or an affiliate of the applicant can register a second level registration under the TLD. As of right now an exemption won’t be granted for a “generic” term, either.

    The term “Affiliate” can extend broadly. .REALTOR applied for an exemption although any licensed REALTOR will be able to use the domain names.

    Google’s Charleston Road Registry filed the most requests so far with 15. It wants exemptions for .gmail, .google and .hangout, among others.

  • Google’s .search top level domain name application survives objections

    1. BY - Feb 06, 2014
    2. Policy & Law
    3. 7 Comments

    Two objections against .search domain name fail.

    GoogleGoogle’s bid to run the .search top level domain name has survived community objections brought by competition groups.

    The objections were brought by FairSearch and Initiative for a Competitive Online Marketplace, both organizations made up of Google competitors.

    This is FairSearch’s third failed objection against Google. It also objected to .fly and .map.

    The panelist in both .search objections granted that both objectors had standing, and even agreed that “search” is a community.

    The community discussion was rather interesting. Panelist Erik Schafer said he was basing his decision on what a community is based primarily on “Implementation Guideline P, Annex C to ICANN GNSO Final Report, Introduction of new Generic Top-Level Domains, 8 August 2007.” That’s five years before applications were due and well before the Applicant Guidebook was created!

    The objections failed because the objectors were not able to show a likelihood of material detriment to the community from Google being delegated the domain names.

    FairSearch certainly made some stretched arguments in its case. This one is my favorite:

    Objector also contends that ceding the TLD ‘.search’ to Applicant alone would create confusion, leading consumers to believe Applicant has been endorsed as the chief, or even worse, the sold provider of Internet search services.

    Endorsed by whom? The Internet gods?

    Google still faces competition, including by Amazon.com, for getting the .search domain.

  • Google’s and Cleveland Clinic’s .Med top level domains rejected

    1. BY - Jan 02, 2014
    2. Policy & Law
    3. 4 Comments

    Panel determines .med would create likelihood of detriment to medical community.

    Cleveland ClinicInternet powerhouse Google and one of the world’s most respected health institutions, The Cleveland Clinic, have both seen their hopes for operating a .med top level domain name dashed by an arbitration panel.

    Both parties were on the losing end of community objections filed by Independent Objector Alain Pellet as part of the new top level domain name objection process.

    International Chamber of Commerce arbitration panelist Fabian von Schlabrendorff ruled that “med,” short for “medical,” represents a clearly delineated community that would face a likelihood of material detriment should either Google or Cleveland Clinic be delegated the .med top level domain name.

    This decision is consistent with another arbitration panel’s ruling against Donuts’ bid for .medical.

    The Independent Objector also filed Limited Public Interest objections against Google, Cleveland Clinic, HEXAP. He lost all of those objections.

    Because HEXAP filed its application as a community application, Pellet did not file a community objection against it. Therefore, assuming ICANN does not create a way to reverse panel decisions, only HEXAP’s .med application continues.

    The decision against Cleveland Clinic is embedded below.

    .Med top level domain name Cleveland Clinic

  • Anti-Google group FairSearch.org loses objection against .map

    1. BY - Dec 30, 2013
    2. Policy & Law
    3. 2 Comments

    Panelist unmoved by FairSearch.org’s arguments against Google’s bid to run a .map top level domain name.

    FairSearch.orgFairSearch.org, a consortium representing companies that compete against Google, is now 0-for-2 in community objections it filed against Google’s top level domain name applications.

    Panelist Vladimir Khvalei has determined that the group’s community objection against .map fails (pdf). It previously lost its objection to .fly, and only a determination on .search remains.

    Khvalei found that FairSearch.org failed on a number of fronts and didn’t have standing to bring the case. He found it difficult to determine how this one organization somehow represents the “map” community, if that even exists, while simultaneously claiming to represent the “search” and “fly” communities.

    He also bought into Google’s argument that FairSearch.org is more of an anti-Google community than a pro-map community (whatever that is), as it did not bother to file an objection against Amazon.com’s closed .map application.

    The panelist in the .fly dispute gave FairSearch.org a bit more slack, only after the panelist re-defined the community FairSearch sought to represent. (You read that correctly: the panelist in the .fly decision re-defined the community at issue to help FairSearch’s argument.)

    Still, in both disputes FairSearch failed to prove the required elements of prevail in a community objection.

    FairSearch.org was tardy in making its EUR 58,600 payment to the arbitration center, which sparked a bit on controversy. The group claimed it had to scrap together the money, but the International Chamber of Commerce let the slight delay slide.