Changes

On July 11, 2011, ICANN filed its response to the arbitration request of Employ Media. The internet governing body strongly defended its notice of breach against the company and remained firm that its decision was appropriate. ICANN also asked the arbitration court to deny Employ Media's request for relief.<ref>[https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:qMFYxr-vmqIJ:www.icann.org/en/news/litigation/employ-media-v-icann/answer-to-request-for-arbitration-22jul11-en.pdf+ICANN+and+Employ+Media+Arbitration&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjKphDhfLHf-8xZ8E8tqSayBuA1SGJina6mbbyq27szb-P7a_i2V79KHJD6nHhFjxUpYO2Td97VLx1rBkJs-Ht1k7bVuM4WTuqtNgZAAGXUFI5cUfWKjkYethxEPH9QAlGAfveP&sig=AHIEtbSXxXw7kr2bKyU4voSfKp_-UqOl7w ICANN’s Response to Employ Media’s Request for Arbitration]</ref>

On July 11, 2011, ICANN filed its response to the arbitration request of Employ Media. The internet governing body strongly defended its notice of breach against the company and remained firm that its decision was appropriate. ICANN also asked the arbitration court to deny Employ Media's request for relief.<ref>[https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:qMFYxr-vmqIJ:www.icann.org/en/news/litigation/employ-media-v-icann/answer-to-request-for-arbitration-22jul11-en.pdf+ICANN+and+Employ+Media+Arbitration&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjKphDhfLHf-8xZ8E8tqSayBuA1SGJina6mbbyq27szb-P7a_i2V79KHJD6nHhFjxUpYO2Td97VLx1rBkJs-Ht1k7bVuM4WTuqtNgZAAGXUFI5cUfWKjkYethxEPH9QAlGAfveP&sig=AHIEtbSXxXw7kr2bKyU4voSfKp_-UqOl7w ICANN’s Response to Employ Media’s Request for Arbitration]</ref>

Currently, ICANN and Employ Media are still waiting for the schedule of their arbitration proceedings, which will be issued by the ICC International Court of Arbitration.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/litigation/employ-media-v-icann  Arbitration: Employ Media vs. ICANN]</ref>

In May 2012, ICANN and the ICC published a timetable for Employ Media's request for arbitration in May 2011. In the timetable, it was revealed that the earliest Employ Media can find out whether or not ICANN has the right to shut down .jobs is in February 2013, with face-to-face hearings scheduled between January 28 and February 8, 2013.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/9032-battle-over-jobs-to-drag-on-into-2013 Battle over .jobs to drag on into 2013]. Published 2012 May 22. Retrieved 2012 November 13.</ref>

==Criticism of Employ Media==

==Criticism of Employ Media==

<ref>[http://www.ere.net/2011/01/18/dot-jobs-universe-growing-again-so-is-controversy/ Dot Jobs “Universe” Growing Again; So Is Controversy]</ref> <ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/2011/05/12/job-boards-launch-another-attacked-on-jobs-registry/Job Boards Launch Another Attack on .Jobs Registry]</ref>

<ref>[http://www.ere.net/2011/01/18/dot-jobs-universe-growing-again-so-is-controversy/ Dot Jobs “Universe” Growing Again; So Is Controversy]</ref> <ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/2011/05/12/job-boards-launch-another-attacked-on-jobs-registry/Job Boards Launch Another Attack on .Jobs Registry]</ref>

==New gTLD Program Disqualification Request Against Employ Media==

===New gTLD Program Disqualification Request Against Employ Media===

On January 11, 2012, .JOBS Charter Coalition chairman John Bell asked the [[ICANN Board]] to block Employ Media and Direct Employers Association from participating in the [[New gTLD Program|new gTLD expansion program]]. Bell claimed that Employ Media should be automatically disqualified from the program because of its '''"history of abuse"''' for violating its charter. Bell also criticized ICANN's failure to resolve the complaints against the .jobs registry operator. According to Bell, ''"ICANN frequently proclaims its dedication to contractual compliance and asserts that the new gTLD program contains multiple stakeholder protection mechanisms, but based on ICANN's mismanagement of the current dot-jobs TLD dispute, the Internet community is rightly concerned that ICANN's public statements will once again prove to be empty words."'' Bell stated that ICANN can only regain a measure of regulatory authority by publicly excluding Employ Media and Direct Employers Association from participating in the new gTLD program.<ref>

On January 11, 2012, .JOBS Charter Coalition chairman John Bell asked the [[ICANN Board]] to block Employ Media and Direct Employers Association from participating in the [[New gTLD Program|new gTLD expansion program]]. Bell claimed that Employ Media should be automatically disqualified from the program because of its "history of abuse" for violating its charter. Bell also criticized ICANN's failure to resolve the complaints against the .jobs registry operator. According to Bell, "ICANN frequently proclaims its dedication to contractual compliance and asserts that the new gTLD program contains multiple stakeholder protection mechanisms, but based on ICANN's mismanagement of the current dot-jobs TLD dispute, the Internet community is rightly concerned that ICANN's public statements will once again prove to be empty words." Bell stated that ICANN can only regain a measure of regulatory authority by publicly excluding Employ Media and Direct Employers Association from participating in the new gTLD program.<ref>

[http://news.dot-nxt.com/2012/01/11/dot-jobs-could-kill-icann The case study that could kill ICANN]</ref> <ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/sites/news.dot-nxt.com/files/jobs-coalition-icann-letter-11jan12.pdf Disqualification of Employ Media and its Principals from Applying for New gTLDs]</ref>

[http://news.dot-nxt.com/2012/01/11/dot-jobs-could-kill-icann The case study that could kill ICANN]</ref> <ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/sites/news.dot-nxt.com/files/jobs-coalition-icann-letter-11jan12.pdf Disqualification of Employ Media and its Principals from Applying for New gTLDs]</ref>

==References==

==References==

{{reflist}}

{{reflist}}

[[Category: Registries]]

[[Category: Registries]]