Popular European domain registrar and ICANN continue to spar over Facebok.com.
Following a notice of breach sent by ICANN to EuroDNS, the two companies have traded jabs in correspondence.
On April 25 EuroDNS CEO Xavier Buck sent a letter (pdf) to ICANN explaining why it had not transferred the domain name Facebok.com, which was lost in a UDRP case. Buck expressed disappointment that ICANN sent the breach notice that publicly “put under question” EuroDNS’ reputation. He said the company reserves the right to “seek reparation” on that point.
According to Buck, EuroDNS did not transfer the domain name because it was named in a lawsuit regarding the domain name shortly after the UDRP decision was handed down. He says ICANN was notified of this so he was surprised to receive the breach notice. He also asked ICANN to indemnify it should the registrar go ahead and transfer the domain.
In response, ICANN Contractual Compliance Manager Khalil Rasheed just sent a letter (pdf) stating that Buck’s letter “includes numerous inaccurate and extraneous assertions that we won’t go into here”.
The letter goes on to request more information from EuroDNS.
This is a different type of lawsuit than those that generally stop the transfer of domains lost in UDRP. Still, I find ICANN’s response a bit puzzling. If EuroDNS’ letter includes numerous inaccurate assertions, ICANN should list them in its response letter rather than make a blind assertion in response.
Mr. Rashid should perhaps re-read UDRP paragraph 8.
“a. Transfers of a Domain Name to a New Holder. You may not transfer your domain name registration to another holder (i) during a pending administrative proceeding brought pursuant to Paragraph 4 or for a period of fifteen (15) business days (as observed in the location of our principal place of business) after such proceeding is concluded; or (ii) during a pending court proceeding or arbitration commenced regarding your domain name unless the party to whom the domain name registration is being transferred agrees, in writing, to be bound by the decision of the court or arbitrator.”
The UDRP is commonly thought of as the administrative proceeding described in paragraph 4, but it applies to ALL disputes concerning domain names. Paragraph 8 of the UDRP prevents transfers during ANY court proceeding concerning the domain name.
It is odd that Mr. Rashid appears not to be able to find that.