Return to tldapps Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: CrossFire
Date/Time: Mon, October 23, 2000 at 5:43 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.01 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: A Solicitation For Readers & Feedback

Message:
 

 
I came across an article today that is very interesting.  I believe it may offer some insight to ICANN as it grapples with the issues surrounding IOD's application.  Before continuing on, please note that I am a ardent supporter of the IOD application.  Also, I have included my name on the FOCI petition which I believe many of you are well aware of.  I think you will find many similarities between this article and IOD's sound application (both of which are my opinions which you may, or may not, share).  Before I offer you my analysis of this article, please take the time to read a section from this article shown below. 

*********************************************************************
Now, .ca domain owners are required to re-register their domain names with CIRA-authorized registrar companies or risk losing them, warned Stephen Smith, president of Webnames.ca, one of the registrars. So far, only about 18,000 of the 100,000 .ca domain names listed in the CIRA database have been re-registered.

"CIRA says that on Nov. 1, if people have not re-registered, their Web sites will just not work," Mr. Smith said.

"In the worst case scenario if all these names represent working Web sites ... there could be 80,000 Web sites that aren't going to work come Nov. 2."

Re-registering simply requires going to a registrar company and paying the necessary fees -- $20 per domain name for CIRA and an additional fee of about $30 levied by the registrars. After Nov. 1, CIRA will double its portion of the fee to $40.

The reason CIRA requires re-registration is that the rules have changed.

Under UBC's old rules, only federally incorporated companies with a presence in more than one province could get a .ca domain name.

"Under the new rules, it's a first come first serve basis, solely based on Canadian presence requirements," Mr. Smith said.

Midnight tomorrow is the last time anyone can register .ca domain names under the old rules.

CIRA promises that even after the Nov. 1 deadline, .ca names on the list will be reserved for 30 days, to Dec. 1.

If they haven't been re-registered by then, the owners lose their rights to that domain name.
**********************************************************************

To me, this article may offer solutions that many are debating with regards to IOD's application and the domain names registered thus far.

As the article seems to indicate, the old system in Canada appears to have been operated much like that of NSI, i.e. prohibitive.  As we are all aware of, access to .Com domain names was not open to everyone for a very long time.  Well, the article above appears to acknowledge that this is not the proper choice of allowing access to domain names.  Instead, CIRA is pioneering a new idea for its country.  CIRA has taken the approach that domain names should be purchased on a first come, first serve, basis.  This type of precedent in Canada should be considered seriously by ICANN when evaluating IOD's application.  ICANN should also note that IOD has set a similar precedent here in the United States long before NSI loosened its grip on .Com and .Net.  Some of you will say that current owners of domain names in Canada will be given a chance to re-register their names prior to the implementation of the first come, first serve, method.  And you would be correct in pointing that out.  My response is as follows: 1) IOD has operated under a first come, first serve, approach from its inception; and 2) NSI has operated from an exclusory position as a natural monopoly from its inception and operated on that system for many years.  CIRA is opting with the approach taken by IOD and dumping the old approach taken by NSI.  In my opinion, CIRA adds immense credibility to IOD's application on this point, especially since CIRA is a thirt-party entity with no interest (that I'm aware of) in IOD's bright future.

I would also like to comment on CIRA's plan of allowing existing owners of domain names the opportunity to re-register such names.  CIRA is respecting the ownership rights of domain name holders by giving them the opportunity to re-register such names.  Many IOD supporters also have ownership rights to their .Web domain names and are looking to ICANN to honor such rights.  Perhaps CIRA's approach can be applied to the situation between ICANN and IOD.

Right about now, many of you are probably cursing up and down at my suggestion.  If so, please read on further so that you can exert all of your anger as once (its more efficient that way).  I speak for myself when I say that I'm perfectly willing to re-register my few domain names in order for ICANN to re-acknowledge my ownership rights to such domain names.  Before any of you comment here, I believe that I currently have a legal right of ownership to my registered domain names which went unquestioned by ICANN for many years.  Nevertheless, CIRA's approach appears to be a plausible solution to the dilema facing ICANN, IOD, and IOD supporters.  I do not mention Afilias here because that organization should not take credit, nor benefit, from IOD's efforts.  While this is obvious to many, others need to be reminded of this fact.

Anyhow, I would also like to see such proceeds go to ICANN itself in a show of support for all of its hard work.  This will also allow many of us IOD supporters to make amends with ICANN as well.  Such funds would amount to almost $1.0 million.  This is not chicken feed by any stretch of the imagination.  Also, it would be a much greater show of respect and support to ICANN relative to the application fee paid by Afilias.  Now, before I proceed further, let me apologize to Chris Ambler for recommending an idea since I know this falls under his purview.  Sorry Chris!

One last reason why I think the re-registering approach makes sense to both ICANN, IOD, IOD supporters and IOD opponents.  Such an approach may cool the tempers of those that believe many IOD supporters are cybersquatters.  By having to re-register .Web domain names, many would-be cybersquatters may be discouraged from having to pay more money.  Those that only own a few domain names would not consider such an idea that costly in order to maintain their ownership rights.  Forcing many to re-register would also allow IOD an opportunity to cleanse the database of a few domain names that are appear to be in conflict with certain trademarks.  I have seen a few questionable .Web domain names only because I was curious as to what lenghts people were going with potential trademark violations.  I firmly people that the latter group of people should not come between ICANN, IOD and IOD supporters that have honorable intentions with .Web.  Also, my remarks on the latter group of people only pertain to those with obvious conflicts, i.e. Coke.Web.  However, those with generic domain names should be allowed to keep such domain names.

Well, that is my take on the article and the issues at hand.  I expect many of you will crucify me, hence my username "CrossFire".  When doing so, please be civil as my ego can only take so much punishment.  I do genuinely look forward to reading your reponses.  The link to the article is shown below.  Thank You!

       
     
     

 

Link: Interesting Article Concerning CIRA's Approach In Canada


Message Thread: