legal Duplicitous ICANN Working Group Jeopardizes Domain Owners’ Rights

[GeorgeK]

A duplicitous ICANN Working Group has issued a report that is open for public comments that would have severe negative consequences for domain name owners. In particular, it would tilt the playing field in a domain name dispute (i.e. a UDRP or the URS) involving IGOs (intergovernmental organizations like the United Nations) in such a manner that it would be nearly impossible for domain owners to have their dispute decided on the merits by the courts. This would encourage consequence-free reverse domain name hijacking. Rather than accept the findings and recommendations of the prior working group, which reached a consensus, this new working group instead had tunnel vision and focused instead on ramming through an alternative recommendation (involving arbitration) for which there was an express consensus against in the prior working group!

The current deadline for comments (unless extended) is October 24, 2021.

Read more about this dangerous report and what you can do to stop its recommendations in my blog post at:

https://freespeech.com/2021/10/12/duplicitous-icann-working-group-jeopardizes-domain-owners-rights/

 

[GeorgeK]

FYI, ICANN just responded to my open letter to them of mid-October re: IGO protections (and I immediately replied):

https://freespeech.com/2021/12/09/icann-responds-to-my-open-letter-regarding-igo-protections/

 

[GeorgeK]

The ICANN working group just published a draft final report to their mailing list that doesn't reflect the public comments, see:

https://freespeech.com/2022/03/06/s...mple-on-domain-name-registrants-legal-rights/

for my discussion. This is a complete sham, one that will trample over the legal rights of domain name registrants.

 

[namezest]

I said years back icann was corrupt. The issues we all have go way beyond domain names. This is what happens when we all just click yes without reading terms. Our rights are being taken away with every excuse under the sun. If you read the terms you wouldn't have a computer or phone let alone domains.

 

[GeorgeK]

As I noted on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1524743084533243905

the ICANN GNSO Council will be voting on the flawed final report next week (May 19, 2022). I hope that those here who have some sway (e.g. GoDaddy and other registrars) will oppose that working group's final report, as the working group ignored the public comments opposed to it, including those that noted that the recommendations went far beyond the actual charter. Registrants will be directly harmed, as their due process protections via court will be eliminated! When that happens, you can expect IGOs to take advantage of the situation and engage in reverse domain name hijacking attempts, as an incorrect decision wouldn't be able to be corrected by the courts.

As we've seen in the ADO.com UDRP and similar decisions, panelists are biased against domain name owners, and this will become even worse if they know that their decisions can't be challenged in the courts.

 

[GeorgeK]

P.S. I made a blog post about it today too:

https://freespeech.com/2022/05/12/i...ed-capture-of-the-original-igo-working-group/

 

[GeorgeK]

And another blog post today:

https://freespeech.com/2022/05/13/p...undermined-the-legitimacy-of-the-icann-model/

 

[GeorgeK]

I tried to simplify things as best I could, to focus on the "mutual jurisdiction" issue, and how that doesn't match what the working group was told to do (i.e. preserving rights). See:

https://freespeech.com/2022/05/15/n...eserve-registrants-rights-to-judicial-review/

i.e. registrants' rights to judicial review are NOT being preserved.

 

[GeorgeK]

Here's a shocking new development --- the registrars constituency is trying to rewrite history, to claim the IGO final report's recommendations are in scope, and don't violate their own charter!

https://freespeech.com/2022/05/17/i...rewrite-history-of-the-new-igo-working-group/

It appears folks are beginning to realize that something is wrong, and are trying to fix things by rewriting history, perhaps to later gaslight opponents.

 

[GeorgeK]

A brand new blog post on this topic:

https://freespeech.com/2022/05/18/i...y-would-be-significantly-challenged-on-scope/

regarding scope, again (with apt quotes from the Chair, Chris Disspain). And also miscellaneous notes at the bottom.

 

[GeorgeK]

We got a small victory today — the vote scheduled for today was deferred 1 month, at the request of the Registrars Constituency! There’s still a big hill to climb, to convince the ICANN community to reject the final report of the new IGO working group (we’d need to prevent a supermajority vote, so we don’t actually need a majority – just need to block a supermajority). Consensus policies require supermajority votes.

 

[GeorgeK]

The vote by GNSO Council is tomorrow (Wednesday June 15, 2022), see item #4 of:

https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2022-June/025719.html

It looks like the sham final report, which will harm the interests of registrants, will be approved. This sell out of registrants' rights will not be forgotten.