The two adult studio plaintiffs also contend that ICANN, which oversees the Internet, provided "no competitive process for the award of the .XXX registry contract."
"[ICM Registry CEO] Stuart Lawley has announced that he expects to be able (and intends) to prevent the establishment of any other (potentially competing) adult-content TLDs, including through a contractual promise by ICANN not to approve such TLDs,"
Researching I did notice that there was a somewhat similar antitrust case filed against ICANN and Verisign in 2005.
I don't think that one got too far.
j
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Nuno Garcia
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I can find a couple of points where I think their argument doesn't hold. If I was an ICANN attorney, I would enjoy preparing this case :)
On 18 November 2011 19:55, Nicolas Adam
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I have some choice quote below. Any comment on the merit of Manwin's
case?
Nicolas
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC -
http://wwwhatsup.com
http://pinstand.com -
http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY -
http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-