[council] Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS

Tue Apr 14 10:29:30 UTC 2015

Hi Phil,

Apart from the question by James, I would be grateful for any further insight you may have into this issue when you publish the article. Please do share a link to your article on this list when it is ready.

Thanks.

Amr

On Apr 14, 2015, at 2:16 AM, James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com> wrote:

> HI Phil:
> 
> How could the “same concerns” have been raised in March 2014?  Wasn’t this primarily an objection to the TLD’s Sunrise pricing practices?  Meaning, if sunrise prices had been closer to the GA wholesale price, would there have even been an IPC letter?
> 
> Thanks—
> 
> J.
> 
> 
> From: Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com>
> Date: Monday, April 13, 2015 at 12:45 
> To: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at egyptig.org>, James Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com>
> Cc: Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-Systems.net>, "jrobinson at afilias.info" <jrobinson at afilias.info>, GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
> Subject: RE: [council] Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS
> 
> I will soon be publishing an extensive article on this matter.
>  
> For now I would point out that, regardless of the timing of the IPC letter, ICANN received a letter from Sen. Jay Rockefeller, then-Chairman of the US Senate Commerce Committee, raising essentially the same concerns in March 2014.
>  
> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
> Virtualaw LLC
> 1155 F Street, NW
> Suite 1050
> Washington, DC 20004
> 202-559-8597/Direct
> 202-559-8750/Fax
> 202-255-6172/cell
>  
> Twitter: @VlawDC
>  
> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
>  
> From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Amr Elsadr
> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 6:52 AM
> To: James M. Bladel
> Cc: Volker Greimann; jrobinson at afilias.info; council at gnso.icann.org
> Subject: Re: [council] Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS
>  
> Hi,
>  
> Apologies for coming back to this thread so late, but just wanted to voice my support of the perspectives offered by Volker and James. As this gTLD has already been delegated, and unless there is any reason to believe the registry is not in compliance with its Registry Agreement, I don’t see why ICANN staff would be required or mandated to freeze the launch of .SUCKS.
>  
> One part of the blog by Allen Grogen caught my attention, and I probably need to look into this a bit more closely before opining:
>  
> “…, if Vox Populi is not complying with all applicable laws, it may also be in breach of its registry agreement. ICANN could then act consistently with its public interest goals and consumer and business protections to change these practices through our contractual relationship with the registry.”
>  
> Personally speaking, although I understand the concerns raised by the IPC, I’m not convinced that there is necessarily any malicious intent on the part of Vox Populi. Like Volker said, I agree that this is an interesting business model. Just not entirely sure its actual objective is to extort trademark holders. If the IPC would like to suggest initiation of a policy process to somehow address this, that would be its prerogative. Additionally, should ICANN compliance staff determine that there indeed is a contractual issue ICANN needs to resolve, I would recommend that a discussion about this be held with the GNSO to clarify the reasoning.
>  
> Thanks.
>  
> Amr
>  
> On Apr 1, 2015, at 6:12 PM, James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Agree with Volker.  
>  
> This TLD has attracted quite a bit of (negative, and perhaps deservedly so) attention recently, but I am confused by this letter.  The window to take action was likely prior to delegation.  Once the TLD is delegated and the contract is signed, I don’t see ICANN Staff having the authority to do anything to “halt” the launch.  Probably why they didn’t….
>  
> Thanks—
>  
> J.
>  
> From: Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-Systems.net>
> Date: Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 10:28 
> To: "jrobinson at afilias.info" <jrobinson at afilias.info>, GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [council] FW: Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS
>  
> Interesting business model, but not really an issue for the GNSO, unless someone is proposing to take this as a basis for new policy development. 
> As an observer with no skin in this game, this looks to be an issue for compliance to determine if the model violates the policies and/or contracts or not and if it does, to take action accordingly. 
> 
> For the interesting question of the different fee structure, there seems to be an explanation already:
> http://domainincite.com/18282-that-mystery-1-million-sucks-fee-explained-and-its-probably-not-what-you-thought
> 
> Best,
> 
> VG 
> 
> Am 01.04.2015 um 11:49 schrieb Jonathan Robinson:
> All.
>  
> FYI.
>  
> Jonathan
>  
> From: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com] 
> Sent: 27 March 2015 20:45
> To: Jonathan Robinson
> Subject: Fwd: Intellectual Property Constituency Communication to ICANN Regarding dotSUCKS
>  
> Dear Jonathan,
>  
> It was a pleasure working with you in Istanbul.  
>  
> In your role as Chair of the GNSO, I am sending you a copy of the attached letter, just sent to ICANN, expressing the concerns of the Intellectual Property Constituency regarding the .SUCKS registry.
>  
> Best Regards,
> 
> Greg
>  
>  
> Gregory S.Shatan
> President, Intellectual Property Constituency
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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.netwww.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>  
> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystemswww.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.netwww.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>  
> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystemswww.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.
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2015.0.5856 / Virus Database: 4328/9503 - Release Date: 04/10/15

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20150414/b573a20c/attachment.html>