ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

Support for Verisign comment and in response to IPC and "David Cohen" comment

  • To: comments-rpm-requirements-06aug13@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Support for Verisign comment and in response to IPC and "David Cohen" comment
  • From: Bobby Yeld <bobbyyeld@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 00:53:10 +0100

1. I support Verisign comments with regards to the need to have an
exception rule for the RPM for allocating IDN domain names prior to
sunrise, where an exact match domain name is currently registered in an
existing TLD run by the same registry

2. @ ICANN re "David Cohen [2]" (sept 18) comment
This persons comment should be voided. He continues to comment using the
name(s) of others who have commented already, trying to cause confusion. He
clearly has a vested interest in the alt-root IDN domains previously run by
domainthenet/regtime, and since recently losing the GTLD Legal Objection is
on some kind of vendetta trying to distort facts about IDN, and even goes
as far as suggesting that only "domainers" are to benefit from Verisigns
and PIR IDN proposed allocation process.  The reality is that IDNs today in
TLDs are registered and used by hundreds of thousands of end users from
around the world.

3. @ IPC comment: "VeriSign’s proposal to allocate all second - level
domains in IDN versions of .COM to existing registrants fails to take into
account prior rights, or whether such existing registrants have obtained
their existing domain name through abusive registration, or are otherwise
using their domain name to infringe on intellectual property rights or in
furtherance of other online fraud and abuse"

The existing registrations you refer to, have mostly been in existence
since the year 2000, that's 13 years of opportunity to exercise UDRP
proceedings. You talk about risks overshadowing benefits. Let me put it to
you, that what you propose will cause considerable confusion, even more so
if the TMCH is gamed with generic trademarks. The bottom line is, whatever
the outcome of this review, the same registrant MUST have control of both
entities, and seeing as one of those entities has been in existence for
years already, the only sensible option that makes sense is for the
Trademark holder who believes they have a legal IP right, to exercise that
right and gain control of the existing domain name through UDRP.

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy