Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ
||Sat, September 1, 2001 at 2:50 AM GMT (Fri, August 31, 2001 at 7:50 PM PDT)
||Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows NT 5.0
||Some thoughts on the .info debacle
I've been lurking in this forum for a while now and finally wish to post...|
targets here seem to be Afilias and ICANN, but especially Afilias, for the way in
which they allowed obviously bogus information to be used to register many highly
sought after .info names, especially generic names. I have seen little disgust
being put forth towards the registrars themselves. Seems to me that they, at
least the ones that allowed this, perhaps are the most guilty for allowing these
bogus registrations to slip through their systems in the first place (I say this
knowing full well that Afilias should have had their own validation going on, too).
Didn't they have an obligation to provide correct/good information to Afilias?
Would it be worth it to concentrate some of the energy here towards ferreting out
the most guilty registrars and perhaps going after them publicly?
Also, I'm not
sure it's been mentioned, but is everyone aware that during the challenge period,
the challenger only gets the $220 refund (if they win the challenge) if the respondent
also puts up the $295 respondent fee? (Note: Every challenger has to put up a $75
non-refundable fee...even if they are not the "priority" challenger...only the priority
challenger has to put up the additional $220 fee) This means that anyone that challenges
an obviously bogus registration will for certain lose the full $295 challenge fee
(because what respondent that used bogus information will respond to the challenge
by putting up the fee...none). This means that even legitimate trademark holders
that challenge a name will pay $295 for the challenge and then another up to $175
($35 per year x 5-year registration) for the registration, total cost around $470.
Seems to me even the legitimate trademark holders have a legitimate gripe here, too.
I think it's time to move on from any idea that Afilias is going to make any of the
names registered with bogus information available during the land rush. It
just won't happen. Doing so would prevent legitimate trademark holders the
opportunity to make a challenge. Also, the idea that Afilias should allow all
names to be made available during land rush and that the winner would serve as a
"backup" to names already bogusly registered during sunrise and returned to the pool
(given to the backup registrant) after Afilias makes their final challenges just
won't fly either. The processes that would have to be put in place to make
this happen are fairly complex (read expensive) and there just isn't enough time
left. Perhaps putting pressure on Afilias to make sure they do a fair Land
Rush II is where our efforts should lie.
- Some thoughts on the .info debacle kerry, September 1 @ 2:50 AM (1/4)