What you can do about a bill that will hurt your domain assets.
Over the past week a lot has been written about the Senate’s so-called anti-phishing bill. On February 25, 2008 U.S. Senator Olympia Snowe introduced S. 2661, the “Anti-Phishing Consumer Protection Act of 2008†(APCPA). The bill is also cosponsored by Senators Bill Nelson (D-FL) and Ted Stevens (R-AK).
This isn’t a bill to stop phishing. It’s a bill to give people another avenue to take your legitimately and legally owned property (domain names) away from you. If you read the bill, you’ll see that it allows anyone with a business (regardless of how big or small, when it was organized, or if it’s trademarked) to go after your domains. Heck, a store could open up with the name “Domain Name Wire” and try to take this site away.
We have UDRP. We have the anti-cybersquatting act which fines cybersquatters up to $100,000 a year. Now we have the “anti-phishing” bill, which will do absolutely nothing to stop phishing but will result in a flood of reverse domain name hijacking attempts.
This article sums up a comment about the bill, points you to where you can read more about it, and then tells you how you can stop it.
Comments on the bill
Declan McCullagh of CNET writes: “It contains 31 pages of new regulations that could raise the cost of doing business for legitimate companies (emphasis added) –but will do little to stop the malcontents behind phishing attacks…Remember, phishing is already a crime.”
GoDaddy Chief Counsel Christine Jones, in response to an inquiry from Domain Name Wire, said: “We have reviewed the bill and think it is a good start. There are some things we would like modified in this bill. One of the main issues deals with privacy on domains. We created Domains By Proxy because a woman was terrified about having her personal information online. She had a stalker and was worried he would not only find her Web site, but her personal information as well. It would be a shame if a few criminals ruined a valuable service for everyone.”
Essentially, this poorly written bill would let anyone make a false claim that requires whois privacy to be removed, gives anyone the right to file bogus trademark claims with penalties of up to $6M, and won’t do a thing to stop phishing.
Remember, phishing is already a crime. And phishers don’t live in the U.S., so they’ll skirt this law anyway.
Where you can read more
The best summary of this bill and its harmful side effects can be found on Internet Commerce’s web site.
It’s also worth reading up on one of the bill’s sponsors, Ted Stevens (R-AK). If you’ve never heard of Stevens, he’s the “King of Earmarks”. In 2005 he got an earmark for $223 million to build the “bridge to nowhere”, connecting to an Alaskan island of 50 residents. When a fellow senator asked him to divert that money to hurricane Katrina victims, he famously shouted “NO!”.
More relevant to this issue, Stevens is known for his inept understanding of the internet. Last year, with telecom firms’ dollars in his pocket, he railed against a proposed amendment to a net neutrality act. He said “an Internet (sic) was sent by my staff at 10 o’clock in the morning on Friday, I got it yesterday [Tuesday]. Why? Because it got tangled up with all these things going on the Internet commercially.” Stevens compared to internet to “a series of tubes.”
What you can do to stop this bill
Sadly, bills like this get passed all of the time. With a title “anti-phishing”, wouldn’t your first instinct be to vote ‘yes’?
Here’s what you can do to stop this bill from passing in its current form:
1. Join Internet Commerce Association. This is the only group that is fighting to protect your interests and is actively fighting this bill. You can join for only $295. If you’re new to the industry and can’t afford that, the organization welcomes any size donation. A percentage of the donation is tax deductible.
2. Write your senator and representative explaining the dangers of this bill. You can contact your senator here or your house representative here. (If it passes the senate it will go to the House.)
3. Contact your registrar and ask them to fight the bill. Registrars have a lot to lose, not the least of which is their cost of doing business will rise dramatically. Odds are your registrar has more money than you, too. Ask them to join Internet Commerce Association (see #1).
4. Write about the injustices of this bill. If you have a blog, blog about it. If you visit forums, post about it.
5. Let the companies that are members of CADNA, which supports this bill, know that you’ll be taking your business elsewhere. That includes:
American International Group, Inc.
Bacardi & Company Limited
Compagnie Financière Richemont SA
Dell Inc.
Eli Lilly and Company
Hilton Hotels Corporation
HSBC Holdings plc
Marriott International, Inc.
Verizon Communications Inc.
Wyndham Worldwide Corporation
An easy way to let these companies know is to contact their public affairs or public relations groups.
6. Did I mention you need to join the Internet Commerce Association?
Stop phishing. Stop cybersquatting. But don’t let people steal your domains.
jack says
Unfortunately,
The Internet Commerce association doesn’t know enough about interent commerce to put a paypal “donate button” on their site. Why should I have to register to donate.
I was on the site last night trying to donate, but I dont’ want to register. I hope they get with the program.
DR. DOMAIN says
@JACK:
Yeah I saw that.Clearly our would-be lobby needs to muscle up that back office part and make it easier & less “creepy” to join.I’m not big on conspiracies…but it would’nt surprise me if both sides of this issue simply see THE GOLDEN SHAKEDOWN.Such is the way lobbies are born.LAWYERS…gotta love ’em.
P.S. If this bill prevails…I’m outta’ this business.
Andrew says
Guys – because this is a lobbying organization, I’m pretty sure it has to collect the information of people giving it money.
Ron Jackson says
Excellent overview of the situation Andrew.
jack says
@ andrew
Internet commerce 101: The best and most efficent way to confrim identity is with a CC. The CC transaction itself is all that is needed. It confirms the address and the name.
Registration info is often fake.
ICA needs to get on the ball fast. For starters they should buy ICA.com
Andrew says
@ Jack – Not disputing that it should be made easier. I also know that ICA finds strength in numbers too. It would really like to have “members” in addition to money.
@ Ron – thanks and keep up the good work spreading the news.
Bryan says
I emailed my senators. EVERYONE NEEDS TO DO THIS. go to domainwire.com .. He makes it easy by providing the link. just copy paiste the ICA response, properly cited. I submitted it under economy, which may be the best approach (that this bill hurts the economy).
Bryan says
wow i just read that list of companies supporting the bill.
looks like we’re screwed.
Justin Godfrey says
Sign the petition to stop the snowe bill at http://www.snowebill.com.
Michael Collins says
Thank you for the valuable comments about donation payments to Internet Commerce Association. It is my understanding that we are supposed to record the source of donations. I will confirm this with our accountant. In any case, donations are not made public and we do now accept PayPal payments.
We are ignorant of the value of ICA.com or even ICA.org. However, both of these domains host established websites. We do not have the funds to pursue acquisition of these names.
jp says
Maybe I am naive as I definitely don’t know much about this stuff, but this is going to be a US law right? therefore why not move your names to an offshore registrar (worst case)? There are pleny of great ones to choose from. Would a registrat in say, India have to comply with a request to turn off Domain Privacy because of some law in the US? I believe all registrars are bound to follow UDRP rules, but not US Law right?
Andrew says
@ JP – The registry, VeriSign, is based in the U.S. so the law could apply that way.
Andrew says
@ Michael – thanks for the update and for allowing PayPal payments.
John Doe says
I think this is great what you are doing, but for the love of god, make our lives easier and provide us the contact information for #5!!!!!!!!!!!!
Michael Collins says
@JP – Whois privacy is only one issue to be concerned about with this bill. Domain owners are subject to damage awards of as much as $6M per offense. I am not a lawyer and this isn’t a legal opinion of the Internet Commerce Association, but the way I read it an offense in this case could be every time a new US resident visits your parked domain. If you are a US resident or use a US based monetization source (Google and Yahoo), someone might figure out how to collect at least part of the damages awarded. If you use a US registrar or registry, they can probably get your domain(s).
Andrew says
@ John Doe – tell you what, I’ll let other readers provide those details 🙂
Andrew says
Here’s a site that will fax a letter directly to your senator (and tell you who that is by just entering your state info):
FreedomSpeaks
Bashkim Krasniqi says
Hello Everyone
What I understand so far is that if you had a domain name that you had trade marked it. You will be able to claim it back back at nay time. I also believe that this is a very good bill especially for those people who are spending thousands if not millions on theier websites only to find out that other people are benefiting from their name. Nw come on how many of you would you like to invest your money for ther benefits of other people.