Coalition for Responsible Internet Domain Oversight: Difference between revisions
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
==Backgound== | ==Backgound== | ||
On June 2o, 2011, ICANN announced its approval of the new gTLD program during the [[ICANN 41]] meeting in Singapore. The program was scheduled to be implemented on January 12, 2012.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/releases/release-20jun11-en.pdf ICANN Approves Historic Change to Internet’s Domain Name System]</ref> Following ICANN's announcement, some groups and individuals expressed their objection. ANA is specifically against the .brand domains plan.<ref>[http://www.webpronews.com/should-icann-overturn-brand-domain-plans-advertisers-think-so-2011-09 Should ICANN Overturn “.brand” Domain Plans? Advertisers Think So.]</ref> Former ICANN Chairman Esther Dyson is also against the plan citing that there are huge trademark issues.<ref>[http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/21/esther-dyson-top-level-domains/ Esther Dyson On New Top-Level Domains: “There Are Huge Trademark Issues”]</ref> | |||
===ANA/Brand Owners Opposition to the new gTLD Program=== | ===ANA/Brand Owners Opposition to the new gTLD Program=== | ||
On August 4, 2011, ANA President and CEO [[Bob Liodice|Robert Liodice]] wrote to [[Rod Beckstrom]], President of ICANN regarding the new generic top level domain names ([[gTLD]]s) program | On August 4, 2011, ANA President and CEO [[Bob Liodice|Robert Liodice]] wrote to [[Rod Beckstrom]], President of ICANN regarding the new generic top level domain names ([[gTLD]]s) program. In his letter, Liodice pointed out that the 400 member companies of ANA strongly opposed ICANN's plan to add unlimited number of TLD. The organization believed that the program does not provide benefit to the internet community but it will only cause harm and damage to brand owners and to consumers. According to him, once the program is implemented it will increase the incidence of [[cybersquatting]] and other cyber crimes. He cited that ANA conducted a research and found that the proposed TLD expansion is not supported by majority of businesses, consumers, academics including private and government agencies. He also quoted the statement of former ICANN Chairman Esther Dyson that the new program is "way for registries and registrars to make money, there are huge trademark issues, it is offensive and will create a lot of litigation." In addition, Liodice enumerated some sections of the ''Economic Considerations in the Expansion of Generic-Top Level Domain Names, Phase II Reports: Case Studies''wherein the experts opined that there is no scarcity of gTLds, the last ICANN TLD expansion provided little benefit thus it was a failure and the implementation of new TLD expansion may result to the following economic harms: | ||
* Misappropriation of Intellectual Property | * Misappropriation of Intellectual Property | ||
* Defensive Registrations | * Defensive Registrations | ||
| Line 45: | Line 47: | ||
He also criticized Liodice's allegations that the new gTLD program will result to "enormous financial burdens" and argued that the quotations he used from the economic studies were biased with unsupported conclusions that more domain names will be exposed to heightened cyber security attacks and violations of consumer privacy. He explained that ICANN formed a team of international experts who developed innovative safeguards against trademark abuses and malicious internet practices. In addition, the concerns of [[Intellectual Property]] stakeholders were well documented and the ICANN Board created a team of 18 IP experts, the [[IRT|Implementation Recommendation Team]] to create additional Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) such as: | He also criticized Liodice's allegations that the new gTLD program will result to "enormous financial burdens" and argued that the quotations he used from the economic studies were biased with unsupported conclusions that more domain names will be exposed to heightened cyber security attacks and violations of consumer privacy. He explained that ICANN formed a team of international experts who developed innovative safeguards against trademark abuses and malicious internet practices. In addition, the concerns of [[Intellectual Property]] stakeholders were well documented and the ICANN Board created a team of 18 IP experts, the [[IRT|Implementation Recommendation Team]] to create additional Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) such as: | ||
* Creation of a Trademark Clearing House | * Creation of a Trademark Clearing House | ||
* Implementation of the Uniform Rapid Suspension ([[URS]]) | * Implementation of the Uniform Rapid Suspension ([[URS]])applications and registration information, fees, general process issues and gTLDs were carefully considered and addressed by ICANN. Beckstrom strongly expressed that ''"ICANN will vigorously defend the multi-stakeholder model and the hard-fought consensus of its global stakeholder | ||
* Establishment of Requirements for Maintenance of a “thick” [[Whois]] Database in all new gTLD Registries | * Establishment of Requirements for Maintenance of a “thick” [[Whois]] Database in all new gTLD Registries | ||
* Establsihment of Post-Delegation Dispute Mechanism to Attach Liability to Registry Operators | * Establsihment of Post-Delegation Dispute Mechanism to Attach Liability to Registry Operators | ||
Moreover, Beckstrom pointed out that ANA's stated concerns submitted on Decemebr 15, 2008 regarding trademark protection,transparency of | Moreover, Beckstrom pointed out that ANA's stated concerns submitted on Decemebr 15, 2008 regarding trademark protection,transparency of participants"'' He also said that ANA is welcome to participate actively in ICANN development processes.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/beckstrom-to-liodice-09aug11-en.pdf Rod Beckstrom Letter to Robert Liodice]</ref> <ref>[http://domainincite.com/beckstrom-strikes-back-at-ana-threat/ Beckstrom strikes back at ANA threat]</ref> | ||
==Establishment of CRIDO== | ==Establishment of CRIDO== | ||