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

[Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch]

Excuse again my ignorance, but is the legislation under 18 U.S.C. § 981(b)(2), which provides a legal framework for property seizures by the government, not general enough to allow for the seizure of a TLD if it is considered as an asset or property being used for committing crimes that may be prosecuted in the US?
Let's say a ccTLD or a gTLD evolve in a way that they may be considered under that act as such asset/property - could it not be seized with the fact that they are registered under ICANN's root being a sufficient connection?
Thanks for any specific hint and regards
Jorge

Von: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org] Im Auftrag von Mueller, Milton L
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. August 2017 16:39
An: ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
Betreff: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] [EXTERNAL] Re: ISSUE: In rem Jurisdiction over ccTLDs

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> [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<mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>; jordan at internetnz.net.nz<mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>; thiago.jardim at itamaraty.gov.br<mailto:thiago.jardim at itamaraty.gov.br>; ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org<mailto: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/d1c6a620/attachment.html>