ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[bc-gnso] FW: 9th Circuit Reverses in CFIT Suit Against VeriSign; Cites ICA for Decisive Role

  • To: "bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx" <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [bc-gnso] FW: 9th Circuit Reverses in CFIT Suit Against VeriSign; Cites ICA for Decisive Role
  • From: Phil Corwin <pcorwin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 17:35:59 -0400

FYI --The US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today reversed and remanded for 
further proceedings  in the case of CFIT v VeriSign, Inc. The case alleges that 
the awarding of the present .com registry contract through the settlement 
entered into by ICANN with VeriSign was in violation of U.S. antitrust laws. My 
law firm prepared an amicus brief on behalf of the Internet Commerce 
Association which is cited by the Court as a decisive factor in reaching its 
decision.  The Opinion is attached.

Please pass this on to other interested parties.

>From the decision:

Moreover, amicus in

this case, the Internet Commerce Association ("ICA"), points

out that when Smith and Weber were decided, "the present

expired domain name market barely existed," and that today's

conditions were "unanticipated only a few years ago."

[15] Here CFIT's complaint alleges that every word in the

English language is already registered as a domain name, and

that desirable domain names can be difficult to come by. On

appeal, our understanding of the distinct role and value of

expiring domain names has also been significantly aided by

the explanation provided by the ICA. As cogently explained

by ICA, expiring domain names often carry with them a history

of established web traffic and advertising support; when

such names do expire, they "still maintain much of [their]

prior inbound traffic," making them more valuable than

domain names that have never before been registered. The

district court, of course, did not have the benefit of briefing

by amicus. With the benefit of this aid to our understanding,

we are not prepared to affirm the district court's ruling that no

separate market exists. We therefore reverse and remand for

further proceedings.

Philip S. Corwin
Butera & Andrews
1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Suite 500
Washington, DC 20004

202-347-6875 (office)

202-347-6876 (fax)

202-255-6172 (cell)

"Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey

Attachment: ICA-CFITvVS_9thCircAppeals-060509.pdf
Description: ICA-CFITvVS_9thCircAppeals-060509.pdf

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy