<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Say No to URS
- To: irt-final-report@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Say No to URS
- From: me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:19:06 -0700
<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000;
font-size:10pt;"><P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT
style="FONT-FAMILY: " size=2 face=Arial>ICANN,</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>We are tremendously concerned about the proposed Uniform
Rapid Suspension (URS) as brought forth by the Implementation Recommendation
Team (IRT). As per ICANN's Mission and Core Values</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial><A
href="http://www.icann.org/en/committees/evol-reform/working-paper-mission-06may02.htm";><FONT
style="COLOR: windowtext" color=windowtext><a
href="http://www.icann.org/en/committees/evol-reform/working-paper-mission-06may02.htm";>http://www.icann.org/en/committees/evol-reform/working-paper-mission-06may02.htm</a></FONT></A></FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>The primarily item ICANN has listed as its top Core
Value...</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial> [a]. Preserve and enhance the
operational stability, reliability, security, and global interoperability of
the Internet.</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>The URS will directly affect all of these things...</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>1.) Operational Stability - The proposed URS is 100%
affecting operational stability of the Internet. It is a "Uniform Rapid
Suspension" and will allow legitimate domain registrations and websites to be
taken offline in an uncontrolled sense! As past UDRP decisions have
proven, generic domains, two letter domains, common phrases and many more have
been taken away from domain owners with no legitimate cause. And now it's
being proposed that this system be cheaper, easier and more open to attacks and
"rapid suspensions." Should the URS be adopted the operational stability
of the web will be put in jeopardy. People will URS domains and get them
shut down - costing businesses worldwide hundreds of millions, if not billions
in revenue every year.</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>2.) Reliability - The URS will allow anyone to file a
suspension on any other website that might be similar in nature. There
will be swaths of people abusing the system and reliability of the Internet
will be at risk. Existing websites and domain names will now be reliant
on a "rapid suspension", directly affecting the reliability of the Internet to
their businesses, and putting many others out of business at the same
time. Again, this is how the URS is in direct conflict with ICANN's core
missions and goals.</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>3.) Security - It's no surprise that the URS will pose
significant security issues for every domain holder in the world! This is
the biggest threat of the URS - directly affecting the security of company
assets worldwide! Any company that owns a domain, of which most do, will
have serious security issues to consider with the threat of URS. With the
URS websites will be inadvertently taken down and every company will risk
possibly lose their real estate for an extremely low cost to the
complainant. For a mere few hundred dollars to the complainant in the
worst case. In bulk it will be as little as only a few dollars!</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>4.) Global Interoperability of the Internet - The global
operation of the Internet will be under serious legal threat and attack if the
URS is adopted. Again, a large amount that ICANN stands for is being
called into question with the URS, because it is so unfair and heavily
weighted, that the global interoperability of the Internet will come into
question.</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>If you look at nearly any trademark database you will find
people with trademarks covering virtually every common word in existence.
"Amazon" is a great example. I do not believe the online store Amazon.com
will abuse such a system, but just imagine any one of hundreds of thousands of
less-than-ethical companies. Amazon could and likely would be able to
shut down a website operated as AmazonRivers.ext that sells something
online. This would be absurd and will create so many unforeseen
issues. I won't even go into the hundreds of potential ways this
seriously jeopardizes a company's assets, security and online presence!
But imagine Amazon.com the online retailer going after everyone that sells
something on their website and has "Amazon" in the domain. It would be
chaotic. Even more, the "abusive" section of the URS says what would
happen if the complainant is denied "three" times in a given year. Is
this serious? A thief will break this security provision
immediately. They will create 100 business identities and never see 3
denied URS cases in any one business entity. Even more, I see where
people will partner with hundreds of trademark owners to gain access of
valuable domains. After all - the only thing a law firm needs to do is
have 100 clients that never use URS, but they can split the added stolen value
from awarded domains. The URS will create a legal niche whereby it only
costs a few dollars to a few hundred try to URS a hundred valuable domains at a
time - many of which are legitimate websites, sites with traffic and millions
of dollars of traffic and marketing, and domains with significant value!
And finally, we can see some will be getting trademarks in smaller markets just
for the sole reason of filing URS and legally stealing domains from legitimate
owners.</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>I think the comments from the National Arbitration forum are
perfect. The prices suggested have not been investigated, and that alone
is a clear indication of how poorly thought through the URS really is.<FONT
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </FONT>What will a URS case really cost?<FONT
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </FONT>If it's as little as two dollars, I
really fear for the judgments and decisions that will be make for domain owners
worldwide! If it's $200 we're still extremely scared for registrants
as well.<FONT style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </FONT>I have no idea who will
front the other 90% of the cost that it takes for even one educated person to
make such a judgement!</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>As everyone has seen in numerous past UDRP cases - the UDPR
system currently works. If anything - it needs reform to protect domain
owners better - because valuable businesses and business assets are being taken
away for sometimes ridiculous reasons! The URS does not help this.
On the contrary it encourages further widespread use and abuse, resulting in
less customer faith in the global operations of the Internet! The URS is
not helping protect, manage and maintain the Internet, but only enabling a
"renegade" online environment when it comes to the future of domain names and
digital assets.</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>Yes, the current URS proposes to be for the "new gTLDs"
only. However - please seriously consider how things in our world really
work. If the URS is approved for "new extensions" today, it only stands
to reason in 2, 4 or 6 years this will work its way back into what is the
fabric of the Internet... .Com, .Net, .Org, ccTLDs and other widely
adopted top level domains. These are under direct threat from the URS,
which is a poor plan with little legal backing or justification.</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>Again - we strongly advise against the consideration of the
proposed URS in any fashion. If it is ever considered, the most important
thing ICANN should do is protect the current fabric of the Internet. The
URS is directly going to attack these things! Directly creating issues
that are in conflict with ICANN's core values and principals. So overall
ICANN should say "no" because nothing the URS proposes is a good idea or plan
for domain name owners worldwide!</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>Please do not let the proposal at hand create operational
issues for domain owners, businesses and individuals worldwide! As we see
it the URS is not in favor of "security", "reliability" or "operational
stability" of the Internet.<FONT style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </FONT>Only
something conjured up by highly funded law firms seeing to protect brands for
the gTLD expansion. Accepting such a proposal would be accepting
something that goes clearly in the face of ICANN's core values.</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>Thank you for hearing our opinions.</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>Keven Dabney</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial>Internet and Domain Professional</FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: "
size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </P></span></body></html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|