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 >