[Ws2-jurisdiction] [EXTERNAL] Re: ISSUE: In rem Jurisdiction over ccTLDs

[Mueller, Milton L]

Yes, Becky this is correct, ACPA is an anti-cybersquatting law for trademark protection and was written with second-level domains in mind.
I guess it is possible that a gTLD would be subject to ACPA - but if and only if someone managed to cybersquat a trademark in the TLD level. And since ICANN's TLD awarding process is so heavily biased toward trademark owners, it is unlikely that a TM-violating TLD (say, giving .IBM to Parminder) would ever happen. But if it did, I supposed it could be applied. I can't see how it could ever be applied to a ccTLD.

From: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Burr, Becky via Ws2-jurisdiction
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 7:02 PM
To: Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch; jordan at internetnz.net.nz; thiago.jardim at itamaraty.gov.br; ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] [EXTERNAL] Re: ISSUE: In rem Jurisdiction over ccTLDs

Fwiw, to the extent that US courts have in rem jurisdiction over domain names, my recollection is that is a function of very specific anti-squatting trademark law and is extremely unlikely to apply to ccTLDs.

J. Beckwith Burr
Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW DC 20006
Office: +1.202.533.2932  Mobile: +1.202.352.6367
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170824/1d66030c/attachment.html>