NameSilo

Important ICANN Comment Period to protect domain name legal rights to due process

Labeled as legal in Domain Industry News, started by GeorgeK, Feb 27, 2017

Replies:
22
Views:
3,566

  1. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
    Hi folks,

    There's an important ICANN comment period on a working group's initial report that ends on Wednesday March 1st at 23:59 UTC time (6:59 pm NYC time), i.e. 2 days from now Update: The comment period just got extended. The new deadline is now March 30, 2017 23:59 UTC (i.e. best to get in comments by the afternoon NYC time). That gives us all more time to polish our submissions, and do more outreach to domain name registrants whose rights are being threatened:

    https://www.icann.org/public-comments/igo-ingo-crp-access-initial-2017-01-20-en
    https://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/igo-ingo-crp-access-initial-19jan17-en.pdf

    The existing comments are at:

    https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-igo-ingo-crp-access-initial-20jan17/

    My own submission is at:

    https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-igo-ingo-crp-access-initial-20jan17/msg00004.html

    and one can submit comments by email using: [email protected] (ICANN will followup with an email, usually within an hour, containing a link to validate/confirm your submission, as an anti-spam measure; click the link so that your comments appear in the archives with everyone else's, and check the above comments archive to verify that it does appear; the comments archive only updates around once per hour, though, so don't worry if it doesn't show up immediately; check back an hour later).

    The working group is especially seeking comments on how to deal with the situation where an IGO wins the UDRP, the domain owner appeals in court, but then the IGO successfully asserts immunity at the court level to block the appeal from proceeding any further. My position (along with the majority of the PDP) is that the UDRP decision should be set aside or vitiated, thereby preserving the legal rights of all parties (as if the UDRP hadn't existed). The alternative is to compel binding arbitration before another UDRP-like panel, thereby eliminating the domain name owner's recourse to its national courts. I explain my position in detail at the beginning of my comment submission.

    While the working group's report is 100 pages, the latter half mostly consists of an external legal report prepared by a professor. While I would encourage people to read the entire document, one can read the summary and the recommendations to get the gist of what's going on. Or, read the comments of others to get a sense of what is at stake.

    Essentially, IGOs (intergovernmental organizations, like the World Bank, UN, NATO, etc.) want to eliminate the ability for domain owners to use the courts to defend their domain name, and instead make binding arbitration compulsory. They particularly covet domain names matching their acronyms. You can see the kinds of names they want in the list of reserved names they got ICANN to blacklist in new gTLDs:

    https://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/packages/reserved-names/ReservedNames.xml (bottom half of the list is for IGOs)

    The IGOs created their own set of recommendations via their own private "small group", instead of working with the open and transparent multistakeholder PDP process which would threaten domain name owners' legal rights to due process. Those recommendations are compared with the PDP's recommendations in the document.

    While it's best to submit your own original thoughts in your own words, it's certainly acceptable to endorse the views of others who made comments (that's what NATO did, for example). While my comments are so far the only ones representative of the interests of domain name registrants, it's my hope that the ICA and others will also submit comments before the deadline.

    You can check out the working group's mailing list at:

    http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/

    and the Wiki at:

    https://community.icann.org/display...urative+Rights+Protection+Mechanisms+PDP+Home

    for more background material.

    This might be your last chance for input on this topic (which has been going on for more than 2 years now). Should IGOs remove the right of domain owners to seek recourse through their national courts, it would be a slippery slope. IGOs are the creation of governments, and they would likely try to continue to erode domain owners rights to due process by targeting geo-names (e.g. City of Paris with Parvi.org) for cases that could not be appealed to national courts. Indeed, TM owners might even try to do the same thing for the UDRP, turning it into its own kangaroo court that can't be appealed to a real court. Thus, it's important to take a stand to defend rights to due process.
     
    The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
  2. Lox

    Lox _____ VIP Gold Account

    Posts:
    2,507
    Likes Received:
    3,481
    IGO copying EU governmental scheme? In essence, this is not "the CASE"! This is Rip Off.
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2017
  3. Bashar

    Bashar Kuwaiti Domainer Gold Account ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    278
    Likes Received:
    10
    As important for Domainers to comment on the topic I believe the topic is unfairly covered into domainers industry

    Thanks George for bringing this up and hopefully enough comments stand up to stop it
     
  4. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
    The comment period just got extended. The new deadline is now March 30, 2017 23:59 UTC (i.e. best to get in comments by the afternoon NYC time). That gives us all more time to polish our submissions, and do more outreach to domain name registrants whose rights are being threatened.

    In other news, the Paris Court of Appeal handed victory to a domain name owner who appealed an adverse UDRP ruling at WIPO, see:

    http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5899d5f9-3bbc-416e-a9a5-7233a147b62c

    The Moobitalk.com UDRP decision which was overturned can be seen at:

    http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=D2013-0835

    This demonstrates why it's so important to defend our right to appeal to real courts, rather than the UDRP kangaroo courts at WIPO/NAF, etc. where panelists are a poor facsimile of real judges and real due process.
     
  5. Lox

    Lox _____ VIP Gold Account

    Posts:
    2,507
    Likes Received:
    3,481
    Great! More time left to polish my (opinion) submission. Thank you for the info!
     
  6. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
    I was able to find the full text (in French) of the Moobitalk court decision, for those that might be interested:

    https://www.legalis.net/jurisprudences/cour-dappel-de-paris-pole-5-ch-1-arret-du-8-novembre-2016/

    These court cases explain why IGOs (and other complainants) want to restrict the rights of domain name owners to go to court. They want to engage in "forum shopping" and know that UDRP panelists are very pro-complainant, unlike a real court where there is a more level playing field with true due process.
     
  7. usernamex

    usernamex Top Contributor VIP

    Posts:
    4,886
    Likes Received:
    12,670
    Found the webinar replay, they have transcript, mp3 and video, I will listen soon, glad there is extension for comments, this will take some brain processing
    IGO INGO Curative Rights Protection PDP Webinar - date 7 Feb
    http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb

    Direct links
    http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-igo-ingo-crp-access-07feb17-en.pdf
    http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-crp-pdp-07feb17-en.mp3
    https://participate.icann.org/p5p8l35brxc/

    @GeorgeK - lemme know if the webinar is a good primer to understand the issue anyway : smile :
     
  8. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
    Yes, that's a good approach to getting up to speed on the topic. It'll also be covered in the upcoming ICANN58 meeting on March 15th, 1:45pm - 3:00pm COPENHAGEN DENMARK LOCAL TIME, see:

    https://schedule.icann.org/event/9n...ions-policy-development-process-working-group

    Remote participation using Adobe Connect will be available for that upcoming meeting (see the bottom of the page of the previous link for details).
     
  9. Lox

    Lox _____ VIP Gold Account

    Posts:
    2,507
    Likes Received:
    3,481
    1 hour and 30min

     
  10. Lox

    Lox _____ VIP Gold Account

    Posts:
    2,507
    Likes Received:
    3,481
  11. Lox

    Lox _____ VIP Gold Account

    Posts:
    2,507
    Likes Received:
    3,481
    bump
     
  12. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
  13. SpareDomains

    SpareDomains Jay VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    3,467
    Likes Received:
    2,458
    Bump for one of the good guys that always keeps his eyes on things. (y)
     
  14. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
    There's just 1 more week left to submit comments to ICANN re: this important topic, preserving the right of domain name registrant to sue in a court, see:

    https://www.icann.org/public-comments/igo-ingo-crp-access-initial-2017-01-20-en

    Submit comments by sending an email to: [email protected] (and then ICANN will send you an email with a link to click, to validate the submission, an anti-spam measure). You can see current comments at:

    https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-igo-ingo-crp-access-initial-20jan17/

    After you click the link in the email from ICANN to validate your submission, visit the above link to make sure your comment appears in the comments archive (it can take an hour or so to appear, as the page only updates hourly).
     
  15. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
    There's just 1 day left to submit comments to ICANN re: this important topic. See the post directly above (in this thread) for instructions on how to do so.

    Thank you!
     
  16. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
    Just to followup on this thread, if you're bored and want to see how messed up things are with ICANN policymaking, I sent a 10 page PDF to the IGO PDP mailing list a short while ago:

    https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2018-April/001139.html

    titled "Everything Wrong with the IGO PDP Summary Report from the Liaison" detailing my concerns about the procedures (scroll to the bottom for the PDF).

    Hopefully these concerns will be addressed so we can finish our work properly.
     
  17. offthehandle

    offthehandle . VIP

    Posts:
    5,129
    Likes Received:
    8,510
    As you know, I have been following this for a few months as an WG observer. This process is much more twisted and complex than I ever expected. It must be that way on purpose. Wading through all these emails is really a lot of work.

    I find the WG RPM mailing list comments to be not only confusing, but running in circles and semi understandable and verbose as they are mostly written it appears by TM lawyers. I have an engineering background, yet it is very difficult to understand many of the broken up bits of “dialog”. Also, as a non legal person or as one who has no parlimentary procedural experience to really effectively participate or understand. The level of difficulty for an outsider to get involved I think is (by design?) to squelch non attorney participation and understand what is actually going on as well as to follow policy and proposals. It’s chaotic at best.

    I read the PDF, and would like to assist but am totally lost. You have invested numerous hours in this free of charge and it would be great if you could in the future perhaps get more domain investors involved. I don’t know what the level of awareness here on NamePros of your work really is, but I do see it. It’s very time consuming for you.

    On the other side, I imagine most of the TM attorneys are Corporate or on retainer as paid participants. All I have concluded is that you appear to be the only vocal domain owner writing in, your questions are pushed aside and not answered and there are really no other stakeholders participating, then numerous times observed the TM lawyers attacking you in a dismissive way. Very disturbing.

    Thank you for your work George.
     
  18. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
    Some familiar faces are in the IGO PDP:

    https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=48347895

    and in the RPM PDP too:

    https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=58729950

    so it's not just me (one can check the mailing list archives, and the recordings of meetings to see who participates). I think anyone who can bring new facts, ideas and analysis would be welcomed. You're right that there is hurdle of learning all the technical jargon, and dealing with the various personalities involved.
     
  19. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
    FYI, due to continuing process concerns, I openly disavowed the PDP's draft report today (which might get submitted as a "Final Report" to GNSO Council tomorrow, i.e. Monday):

    https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2018-July/001379.html

    While the recommendations are recorded accurately (and we mostly reached the correct policy outcomes), the supporting text needs quite a bit of work, and it seems few have even read it. An impossibly short deadline to finalize the report is essentially sabotage, making it easier to get rejected once it gets to the GNSO Council or ICANN Board, due to the sparse supporting rationales, etc. We only got the most recent major draft 6 days ago (last Monday), and few (if any besides me) have even read it, or had time to contemplate and review it properly.
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2018
  20. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
  21. GeorgeK

    GeorgeK Leap.com PRO VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1,652
  22. NameZest

    NameZest Top Contributor VIP

    Posts:
    1,403
    Likes Received:
    1,899
    That's what happens when non-profit turns for profit. They appear to be creating a method of immunizing themselves legally like a sovereign state. However such a move cannot be legal as they themselves actually profit and have profited from each and every domain registration and renewal. That is corruption, unethical in effect racketeering. How much has icann made from the registration of typo and clear trademark infringement domains? In the US that is also a violation of the 6th Amendment right to confront.
     
  23. offthehandle

    offthehandle . VIP

    Posts:
    5,129
    Likes Received:
    8,510
    @GeorgeK I read this today, although I follow the mailing list had no idea this occured, this complaint.

    http://domainincite.com/23633-kirikos-lawyers-up-after-icann-etiquette-fight

    I have been reading constantly and see your hours of time investment most all of the various exchanges now for months with shock as to some of these “Professionals” and their conduct. You put in tremendous amounts of research to receive only disputes from the IP crowd. I wish there were more people involved of your skill set with significant domain investments and participation and near your knowledge level and skills. I remain impressed with your ability to cite UDRP cases and locate data as needed. The process seems to be made more complex than necessary by the players involved and the continual oppositions to your requests. Keep up the good work.
     

Want to reply or ask your own question?

It only takes a minute to sign up – and it's free!
biix
  1. NamePros uses cookies and similar technologies. By using this site, you are agreeing to our privacy policy, terms, and use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
Loading...