Evan:
I personally don’t believe that
domain speculation is “abuse,” any more than real estate or stock
market speculation is inherently abusive.
Nevertheless, yours is a perfectly
legitimate position and like all such positions any member of NCUC has a right
to express it especially on open working groups, and in our NCUC-discuss list.
We did have a NCUC member on that RAP group,
and we have already gone through some angst trying to figure out how certain things
(e.g., gripe sites that use a trademarked name) got defined as “abuse”.
One of the problems with relying on noncommercial group volunteers is precisely
that they are not specialists and therefore not well-attuned to the games
played by the professionals on these groups. It takes time to learn the ropes. The
only way to have an impact is to be persistent and learn the ropes and speak
out.
I believe that the domain name secondary market
is an economic issue and if you believe in regulating domaining or speculation
in new ways (i.e., in addition to UDRP and the new limits on “tasting”)
let’s hear about it.
--MM
From: Non-Commercial
User Constituency [mailto:
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 8:00
PM
To:
Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS]
Registration Abuse Policies Working Group
Hello Evan,
I am glad that you have brought up the issue of the Registration Abuse
Policies Working Group because I have also been hearing things about it working
to make anonymous online speech more difficult over concerns of trademark infringement
and the like.
But we need to get more people in this group - which has been operating
under the radar of much of the GNSO, but I think would concern the GNSO if they
knew what they were up to. We need quite a few smart techies in this
group who can cross swords with dozens of highly paid business lobbyists.
And we should coordinate our strategies to the extent possible.
The issue that I would like for this group to explore is
"trademark lawyer abuse" and how overzealous trademark lawyers abuse
the system, often over-state their claim, and take over domain name
registrations in a "bullying" fashion.
And from what I've heard, this RAP working group wants criticism on
websites to be considered per se "abuse" of a domain name!
So I think there may be many important issues we should look into with
respect to this RAP WG and this could be a good opportunity to collaborate on
issues.
Let's talk further and find our members who want to work on this group.
Thank you,
Robin
On Jul 6, 2009, at 6:48 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Hello all,
At the
Well, that's the theory. What I found at that meeting was a room full of vested
interests and contracted partied, determined to report to ICANN that the only
real form of registration abuse is that of trademark abuse.
When I dared mention at the
Now, I know that not everyone within At-Large is an opponent of domain
speculation. But I would like to get some guidance -- or some opinions --
regarding whether this voice needs to be maintained within this group. I am
especially astounded that there was nobody from NCUC at the group, leaving the
At-Large people -- and me specifically, in this particular case -- trying to
make the case that not all registration abuse is trademark related.
As I get ready to participate in a conference call of this group for which I am
ill prepared (just got home yesterday after a second conference I had that
followed
I am fully aware that I am not acting as an At-Large, and as such speak there
for nobody but myself. However, it would be helpful if I could be guided by
previous At-Large policy and current At-Large sentiment.
Is the statement "domain squatting and speculation constitutes a form of
registrant abuse" accurate to anyone here? Or should I be advancing issues
related to other forms of registrant abuse? Or should I even bother? I have
better uses of my time than being at the end of a verbal firing squad.
I'd also like to hear some perspectives from Beau and Patrick, the only other
"user" minded people in the room that day.
- Evan
IP JUSTICE
p: +1-415-553-6261
f: +1-415-462-6451