ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    New gTLDs DIRECTI's Response to False Allegations against our IP Claim Protection Program
    posted by michael on Thursday March 14 2002, @07:40AM

    bhavin writes "There have been certain allegations floating about our unique .BIZ IP Claim Protection program. I would like to discuss the theme behind the process in order to quell most of these allegations."



    * Most .BIZ IP Claimants have this inherent feeling that by purchasing an IP Claim on the domain name they are secure, and that they will get their domain name irrespective of whatever happens in this Round Robin. You may do a survey yourself and obtain similar results. This is because during the IP Claim sale phase a large number of Resellers convinced companies that the only way to protect their IP interests was to buy a $90 IP Claim, and that by buying it their interests would be secured.

    * Those who are aware that they do not have any special chances of getting their domain name are not aware that they would need to fork out $1500 per domain name to win their domain name back if a Speculator gets it.

    * Over the last 2 months since the .BIZ Round Robin process was announced, a large number of Customers have approached us, and other Registrars who we have spoken to to apply for Domain Names in the Round Robin process. We took a distribution set of these clients and found out that over 96% of these clients are speculators.

    * In .INFO there were well over 1500 Sunrise Challenges and over 10000 more filed by Afilias itself at a value of $249 per Challenge it comes to a wastage of over $2.8 million. Additionally a large number of genuine IP holders still missed out on their domain names

    * When we initially investigated various business models of various Registrars, we realised that in the .BIZ queue too a large number of domain names would end up going to the Speculators resulting in Domain Name and IP mayhem of the kind never seen before. Speculators could hold IP Claimants ransom since IP Claimants would need to spend $1500 to obtain a name with no guarantee of results

    * We decided therefore to work an alternative strategy and assist only IP Claimants in obtaining their names. Therefore we have submitted all our names through various other key Registrars as well as our own queue on behalf of only IP Claimant holders. We have put in our details for the Registration of the name and will change that after registration to the appropriate IP Claim Holder and transfer the domain name to them. This was the only way to prevent Speculators from getting hold of these names and then IP Claimants having to file an expensive STOP proceeding.

    * I have been practically inundated with email and chat from various genuine IP Claimants who were never aware of the fact that by having the ip claim they would not get the domain name. All of them have been thankful that someone atleast bothered to put up 10 pages of comprehensive information to educate them on the issue. some of the names of clients who have used our consultancy to improve their chances include Samsung, SEIKO, Intuit, Suzuki etc

    * We clearly DO NOT take an ip claimants domain name unless the ip claimant actually wants us to do that. We also do not CHARGE ANYTHING to multiply their chances right now - we charge ONLY if we successfully register the name for them

    Lastly I would like to say - that as a Registrar i had numerous offers from speculators ready to offer me HUGE amounts of money for domain name spots in our queue (check enom.com they have bids of well over $15000 for some names). we would have made a lot more money had we decided like all other registrars to entertain speculators.

    However i will sleep better at nights knowing that applications in our queue belonged only to genuine ip claimants and we did not cater to ONE SINGLE speculator.....

    I would love to have a conversation with any of you about my feedback in further detail if you would wish to speak with me

    Regards
    Bhavin Turakhia
    Directi
    http://www.directi.com

     
      ICANNWatch Login  
    Nickname:

    Password:

    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    DIRECTI's Response to False Allegations against our IP Claim Protection Program | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 13 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: DIRECTI's Response to False Allegations agains
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Thursday March 14 2002, @08:05AM (#5284)
    User #2810 Info
    bhavin writes:
    Most .BIZ IP Claimants have this inherent feeling that by purchasing an IP Claim on the domain name they are secure, and that they will get their domain name irrespective of whatever happens in this Round Robin.
    Isn't that in fact the case? How could a speculator have even an equal chance at a name for which someone has filed an IP claim, let alone a superior chance?
    In .INFO there were well over 1500 Sunrise Challenges and over 10000 more filed by Afilias itself at a value of $249 per Challenge it comes to a wastage of over $2.8 million.
    Please provide a pointer to information showing that Afilias is paying $249 per challenge.

    Would you also like to address the points raised regarding your apparent breaches of sections 3.7.3., 3.7.4., and 3.7.7. of the ICANN registrar accreditation agreement? -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: DIRECTI's Spam Attack
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Monday March 18 2002, @06:56AM (#5356)
    User #2810 Info
    The FTC is in the US, Directi isn't. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com