advice What should the ICA be doing?

[equity78]

@Zak Muscovitch posted about the ICA filing a brief in the Booking.com case. The conversation has led to what can the ICA be doing that would make you feel better about the ICA and possibly join?

 

[equity78]

Here Zak posted the ICA opinion on Booking.com

Ultimately, the ICA decided to support the status quo. Currently generic.com domains can, with massive advertising and promotion over time, become distinctive.

The USPTO wanted to change this and make a rule that 'it can never happen'. That new rule seemed unreasonable. I can see how the word HOTELS can *never* become monopolized by one company fas a trademark for hotel services no matter how much they spend promoting it. But I can see how HOTELS.COM *can* become a brand *over time with enough promotion*, and that it what is permitted now. But even if HOTELS.COM became a trademark for hotel services, I would expect the court to provide *very narrow enforcement* to it, such that it would not extend to the word HOTELS alone, thereby protecting the generic term. It is a pretty rare case where a generic.com achieves trademark status, but it can happen and already does on occasion.

To reiterate, the ICA supported the *status quo* - how things are now. That means that what is lawfully permitted now, should continue.

The ICA has never been against trademark rights, just overreaching trademark owners. That has not changed. The ICA has never been in favor of cybersquatters, and indeed our Code of Conduct prohibits cybersquatting (See https://www.internetcommerce.org/about-us/code-of-conduct/).

If someone registers B00king.com (two zeros) in order to divert Booking.com's customers and potential customers, that is currently actionable under unfair competition law and passing off, and would also be actionable as trademark infringement if Booking.com obtained a trademark. But if someone registered HotelBookings.com, that would be a completely fair and lawful registration as it does not infringe upon the very limited rights that Booking.com would have (their rights would not be to the parts of the mark, i.e. to BOOKING alone, but only to BOOKING.COM as a whole), even if it were permitted a trademark under the current law after proving acquired distinctiveness through extensive advertising and promotion.

Also consider extensions beyond .com. Should CANDY.CLUB for candy sales never be permitted to be trademarked? How about CANDY.GURU for candy sales? The USPTO's new proposed rule would prohibit any generic.TLD as a matter of course, regardless of the degree of acquired distinctness or the impression of the domain name as a whole including the TLD. That being said, CANDY.COM can't just get a trademark easily. It would need to show that it ceased meaning to the general public that it was a site about candy, and had become, through extensive advertising and promotion, identified with a particular business. And if it did get a trademark, it wouldn't be able to use it to take the generic word Candy out of the English language or prohibit it from being used in a domain name.

Now, that being all said, I can appreciate that this is a difficult issue and the ICA did indeed struggle with it. For a case to get to the Supreme Court of the United States, it generally means that it is a difficult issue and that there are many perspectives on it, all of which are legitimate.

You can read the ICA's brief here: https://www.internetcommerce.org/internet-commerce-association-files-supreme-court-brief/.

This was the first time that the ICA filed a brief with the Supreme Court of the United States.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/is-ica-your-friend.1179294/#post-7656996

 

[equity78]

Poll on here I started last year about the pricing.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/what-price-would-you-pay-to-join-the-ica.1164114/

 

[Samer]

Lower fees be more accepting most investors

why no higher fee lifetime membership option?

Oh well least they offer discount for students..

Samer

 

[Business Brands]

litigate

 

[Chris Hydrick]

what can the ICA be doing that would make you feel better about the ICA and possibly join?

1. Enforce their Code of Conduct.
2. Hire a new General Counsel that doesn't have a history of attempting to instruct a victim of a stolen domain, to pay him the price his client (current domain registrant at the time) allegedly paid, in order for her to recover her stolen domain.

 

[Rob Monster]

I think the single biggest thing is making WIPO UDRP disappear.

The entire apparatus is skewed towards serving as bounty hunters for their client sponsors.

I finally had enough of it and learned from Michael Eddy how to file a pro se lawsuit. Michael and his awesome wife have had great success doing that.

So why are we not teaching people how to do that, or creating processes that allow bogus UDRP outcomes to be challenged in civil courts?

I did attend the ICA dinner at NamesCon Austin. I was hoping to find out more about their plans. Somehow that was not really covered in between the food and the award ceremony.

Here is my top 2 for ICA:

1. We need to empower domainers to use the law effectively to defend their rights regardless of where they are domiciled so that corporate thuggery can be held in check.

2. We need to work with congressional advocates to work towards making domain assets more bankable. The topic is covered at length here. ICA as lobbyist could play a key role here.

 

[oldtimer]

1. We need to empower domainers to use the law effectively to defend their rights regardless of where they are domiciled so that corporate thuggery can be held in check.

The WIPO UDRP is a system that is business and corporate friendly based on the assumption (perhaps fact) that businesses and companies are doing a lot more to benefit the public through the products and services that they offer and the jobs that they create than those who perhaps are hoarding domain names and are only thinking of that which benefits themselves.

There are blatant misconduct and overreach on both sides of the equation. We need to advocate for a system that is fair and that is designed to protect the legitimate rights of all sides involved.

2. We need to work with congressional advocates to work towards making domain assets more bankable. The topic is covered at length here. ICA as lobbyist could play a key role here.

As long as you are Renting the domains from the registry on a yearly basis I believe that they can not be considered real assets. If you want to make domain names bankable you need to change the whole system in a way that registrants can actually own the domain names on a more permanent basis.

But overall I like the two points that you have made and I would add a third one as far as preventing and fighting against all the phony and overreaching Trademarks.

IMO

 

[Internet.Domains]

I just left this post in another thread. Thought I would share it here as well, seeing how the thread forked.

Thank you @Zak Muscovitch for taking my call today. Your passion for the domain community should not be understood, it is phenomenal!

After a lengthy and detailed conversation I am truly impressed with the accomplishments, over a range of different issues, under your leadership. I am truly impressed!

I feel the ICA is doing exemplary work for the domain investing community. Making progress, changes and setting higher standards for the benefit of the entire domain investing community. Again, I am truly impressed.

Thanks for all you are doing for the domain community Zak!

 

[equity78]

Not a lot of comments so far.

 

[oldtimer]

Here is my post from another thread:

" I still believe that ICA should fight to protect the rights of all registrants and not to work to advance the agendas of the special Interest.

I also believe that decisions of this importance should be made by some kind of a board or a vote amongst high ranking members at ICA rather than be based on the judgment (and in some cases perhaps the agendas and interests) of just one person in this organization."

https://www.namepros.com/threads/is-ica-your-friend.1179294/page-2#post-7661191

 

[coolhands]

look at their Membership Pricing:

Why a non-profit Association have one of the most expensive membership I ever seen ???? $25,000 , Even The 39 Monte Carlo Club doesn't have theses expensive fees.

we are waiting for an explanation from an ICA Staff

 

[bmugford]

look at their Membership Pricing:

Why a non-profit Association have one of the most expensive membership I ever seen ???? $25,000 , Even The 39 Monte Carlo Club doesn't have theses expensive fees.

we are waiting for an explanation from an ICA Staff

I am a member. I also think they should offer a lower price tier.

At the same time, one reason is the domain investing field is still rather small.
It is why niche technical books tend to be more expensive than best sellers.

This is not a field with many millions of people in it.

Brad