It appears that the NCSG constituency is treating such issues as binary, 
and quick to take sides around .doctor and .sucks, with positions 
bolstered by slices of logic. I am going to post a simple "sticky Note" 
on the wall here, knowing full well that it will be ignored, but 
offering it as an opinion that is also a testable hypothesis:

"These episodes around gTLDs are going to come back to haunt ICANN in 
ways that will not be pleasant.". :-(

As for what could or would constitute digital extortion...that case law 
is yet to be assembled....but it will be. <= another testable hypothesis 
:-)

Sam L.

On 28/03/2015 11:44 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> I’m on .sucks side on this one.
>
> In effect, the .sucks domain seems to be engaged in a legitimate form 
> of price discrimination between brand owners who want to suppress 
> critical expression about their brands and people who actually want to 
> use the domain for its intended purpose.
>
> Extortion means that one is threatened with violence or some other 
> form of illegal harm if one doesn’t pay up. The idea that paying a 
> high fee to preempt the mere possibility that someone might register 
> and use a critical domain such as brand.sucks is not extortion.
>
> --MM
>