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

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
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)

    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Afilias SUNRISE POLICY Revived. | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 8 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    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: Afilias SUNRISE POLICY Revived.
    by fnord (reversethis-{moc.oohay} {ta} {k2yorg}) on Wednesday November 28 2001, @07:04AM (#3871)
    User #2810 Info
    As asked on the ICANN new TLD forum, what happens with someone who has already challenged? Is this change retroactive? If so, did the registrar-registrant contract allow for a unilateral retroactive modification? If not, wouldn't this have legal consequences? In fact, the already existing wording seemed to allow Afilias to do what they are doing without coming out with this new and improved version.

    What I find laughable is that the challenge speculators have ponied up their money to take a chance at names like business.info so both WIPO and Afilias are making additional money from the same name. How is this preferable to using a lottery, or an auction, or how is this is even distinguishable from such? Not that I'm in favor of sunrise for all new TLDs, but for those that use it, if this whole rigamarole is necessary after the fact, why not just do it properly in the first place? Is it because Afilias and registrars would then only get paid once for the name, and WIPO wouldn't get anything? No doubt even more companies would have put up $50k for a chance at running an ICANN TLD if they were aware they'd be allowed to sell a single name numerous times.

    I'd reported earlier that the first .info WIPO sunrise challenge results were in, though incomplete and confusing. Although there have been updates and additions and changes, that still holds true. Where is the actual text of the decisions, as one can access with WIPO UDRP rulings? Well, perhaps we'll never see them. From my wording link above:

    10. Center Decisions

    (a)...The Center shall not be required to state reasons for its decision.

    Secret rulings. More ICANN incrementalism. What's next? Military courts? -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Afilias SUNRISE POLICY Revived.
    by eric (eric@godbless.info) on Friday November 30 2001, @04:22AM (#3890)
    User #2784 Info
    Of course you must have a sense of humor about this matter. The post you replied to claimed to register "business" under a trademark. And of course if this is true he should also claim "jackass" and "fraud" and get his picture lodged under both in the dictionary. OTOH, if he merely did it to prove a point then my hat is off to him, and I should like one of his pictures.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Afilias SUNRISE POLICY Revived.
    by fnord (reversethis-{moc.oohay} {ta} {k2yorg}) on Friday November 30 2001, @10:14AM (#3892)
    User #2810 Info
    Peter Maggs writes:
    Does this mean that initial fraudulent registrants of generic names will get to keep them...
    To my understanding, no. Afilias will self-challenge bogus sunrise registrations beginning December 26, 2001. Of course they'll have to figure out which they consider bogus, so some may be overlooked. On your other points, presumably a bogus challenge will fail (as I say, WIPO is being quite obtuse about its rulings), or if it succeeds it can/will be challenged by Afilias as above. Finally, it is too late to get a trademark registered for this process, it has to pre-date it.

    Some have covered that angle and got trademarks on sex et cetera, and no doubt more will do so on good generic names in advance of future TLDs. The trademark protection folks tried to control the namespace, so some speculators are using their own trademark process against them and have just moved up a level to become trademark squatters. How they'll be removed from there is anyone's guess. You can presumably get a trademark for sex with regards to a brand of table or boat or lightbulb through the USPTO, and there are probably quite a few non-US trademark offices with lower standards. The trademark lobby should have left well enough alone. Sue those who are clearly infringing, sue them large and make an example of them, and leave everyone else alone. Instead they try to extend trademark protection to where it doesn't fit and wind up making it a bigger mess. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 2 replies 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