[gnso-rpm-wg] 99%+ reduction in sunrise utilization rate per TLD supports EFF call for elimination of sunrise

Fri Aug 11 13:58:01 UTC 2017

Could we use a list of the top brands to establish eligibility for sunise
to remove gaming once and for all?

Here's a list of 500 as an example.
http://brandirectory.com/league_tables/table/global-500-2012

Best regards,

Paul.

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net>
wrote:

> I will not dispute the effectiveness of Sunrise periods for rights
> holders, however there may be better options that provide just as much
> protection but have less impact on the release of a new TLD.
>
> For example, sunrise could be run concurrently with the general launch of
> a TLD simply by removing the eligible sunrise domain names from the pool of
> available domain names. Rights holders could still use their TMCH-tokens to
> register these semi-reserved strings as domain names but the release of the
> TLD to the general public would not be held back. Other potential
> registrants would merely receive a notice that this string is reserved
> until date X due to claimed rights of third parties (which could double as
> an abbreviated claims notice), or even opt to queue their registration
> request until the reservation period is over.
>
> This would actually solve many of the existing issues.
>
> Best,
>
> Volker
>
>
>
>
> Am 11.08.2017 um 15:12 schrieb Nahitchevansky, Georges:
>
>> ‎I was not going to engage in yet more back and forth on sunrise, but in
>> reading your email, and those of several others, I feel compelled to say
>> something on this by the numbers discussion.  This type of metric driven
>> approach is very much akin to driving down a road with blinders on either
>> side. It's a tad pedantic and as we know from history these types of
>> approaches (many times pushed by bureaucrats) can often lead to disastrous
>> decisions (e.g. Soviet style five year plans). You need to look at the
>> overall situation and what is going on, as opposed to just getting caught
>> up in the numbers -- which after all can get sliced and diced any number of
>> ways. The reality is that brand owners are using  sunrise to protect their
>> brands in the key extensions that relate to their businesses. The numbers
>> may not be huge per se, but the new gTLD program has pretty much, by all
>> accounts, not been the success that ICANN had hoped for. Moreover, we all
>> know that the success of the extensions has been quite uneven. Some are
>> barely breaking even, some have been a great success, others have failed
>> and yet others have only experienced lackluster results. What all of this
>> means is that some extensions are simply not worth registering in.
>>
>> That being said, sunrise does have an important value. If there are up to
>> 100,000 plus registrations based on bona fide brands, and some on the most
>> valuable brands in the world, then the system is working as it is
>> preventing a significant amount of cybersquatting .  If we go by he metrics
>> you love, then it is not rocket science to figure out that a landrush
>> approach is going to lead to a large spike of abuse (as we have seen in the
>> past in no sunrise situations). This  in turn leads to significant costs of
>> investigating and pursuing infringements, all of which ultimately leads to
>> more costs to consumers and  loss of faith in the integrity of the system
>> -- particularly if consumers get tricked or defrauded by a domain name that
>> appears to be related to a brand (e.g., Gucci.shoes) and which could have
>> been registered during a sunrise period.
>>
>> So while I understand that brand owners are not making sunrise
>> registrations across 1000 plus extensions, the point is that they are
>> generally picking the most logical extensions and are not abusing the
>> sunrise system. So whether the number is one percent or less or ten
>> percent, that number doesn't really  tell the story. 100,000 plus sunrise
>> registrations prevents a ton of abuse, which benefits everyone in the end.
>> The numbers only approach really misses the mark. It's like saying that if
>> a disease affects less that 1% of the world population, we should not waste
>> money on finding a cure for it and stop all funding on such research (even
>> though the costs of treating the disease for the less than 1% will be
>> staggeringly high).
>>
>> So in closing, I again urge you to concentrate on trying to find a fix to
>> address the limited speculator issue as opposed to beating a dead horse on
>> the sunrise issue.
>>
>> ‎
>>    Original Message
>> From: George Kirikos
>> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 12:22 AM
>> To: gnso-rpm-wg
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] 99%+ reduction in sunrise utilization rate per
>> TLD supports EFF call for elimination of sunrise
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:21 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't see the math that created your "talking point" of a "99%+
>>> reduction
>>> in sunrise." Can you show your work please?
>>>
>> The post at:
>>
>> http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2017-August/002321.html
>>
>> showed numerous sunrise statistics, ranging from 15,000 on the low end
>> for .mobi (.co was slightly lower, although that's a ccTLD, not a TLD
>> that ICANN is involved with in any way), 32,000 for .asia, 80,000 for
>> .biz/.xxx, and who knows what it was for .info?
>>
>> Even taking the lowest of those (15,000) as the base, 130 (average
>> new gTLD sunrise from The Analysis Group report) divided by 15,000 =
>> 0.0087 = 0.87%, which is less than 1%, i.e. a 99%+ reduction. Of
>> course, if one chose a higher base (.asia, .xxx, .biz, .etc.), or an
>> average of those other sunrises, the reduction is even greater than if
>> one had used the lowest sunrise (from .mobi).
>>
>> As for your other statement:
>>
>> We can't expect Sunrise registrations to outperform the New gTLD Program
>>> generally."
>>>
>> While the new gTLD program has been a disaster, it hasn't been an
>> underperformance of 99%+ of expectations (perhaps more like 80% to 90%
>> underperformance). Thus, while it's obvious that both have been
>> failures, sunrise usage is an even greater failure than new gTLDs
>> overall. So, even on that relative scale, the sunrise period should be
>> eliminated.
>>
>> Since I know you'll ask "George, why do you say there's been an 80% or
>> 90% underpeformance for new gTLDs?" let me answer that now to save
>> time. I'll use as my reference (besides the obvious general
>> observations of most informed observers) ICANN's own stats:
>>
>> http://domainincite.com/18857-new-gtld-sales-miss-icann-esti
>> mates-by-a-mile
>>
>> where the numbers came in at just 18% of ICANN's original 2014
>> expectations. For the math-challenged, 100% - 18% = 82% as the level
>> of underperformance.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> George Kirikos
>> 416-588-0269
>> http://www.leap.com/
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> Confidentiality Notice:
>> This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the
>> meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section
>> 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by
>> the sender of this message. This transmission, and any attachments, may
>> contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney
>> work product. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure,
>> copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or
>> attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Please contact us
>> immediately by return e-mail or at 404 815 6500, and destroy the
>> original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any
>> manner.
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> ***DISCLAIMER*** Per Treasury Department Circular 230: Any U.S. federal
>> tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is
>> not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of
>> (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting,
>> marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter
>> addressed herein.
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>>
>
> --
> 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 at key-systems.net
>
> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> 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
>
> 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 at key-systems.net
>
> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay
> updated:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> 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
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170811/41437a94/attachment.html>