Tag Archives: .SUCKS

Daily Wrap: Patent Troll Takes Aim At Registrars, NamesCon 2017 Discounts,.SUCKS Registrars Claim Being Gagged, New .DK Self-Service Option And Privacy And Proxy Services To Be ICANN Accredited

DK HostmasterA patent troll is taking action against registrars, according to a Domain Incite report. According to the report, “WhitServe LLC, which beat Go Daddy in a patent lawsuit last year, is now demanding licenses from registrars that could add as much as $0.50 to the cost of a domain name.” The patent troll is demanding monies that could be as high as the millions from registrars on both sides of the Atlantic.

NamesCon 2016 has only just finished with around 1,200 attendees and the organisers have already announced the 2017 event with discounted early bird tickets for individuals. For those wanting to register in advance, there are a limited number of tickets available for $299 plus booking fee. That’s around $700 off the door ticket price. The 2017 NamesCon will be held again in Las Vegas from 22 to 25 January.

For those who like their news swinging way to the right, coming in the northern spring of 2016 is the .fox gTLD. But it won’t only be a home of the networks heavily slanted news programming, it will also be the home of all 20th Century Fox programming, films and sport. And it will showcase everything for your PC, tablet and mobile.

In another Domain Incite report, “registrars are ignoring new provisions in their .sucks contracts that they say amount to a ‘gag order’”. The report notes that “registrars ask for ICANN to convene a face-to-face negotiation between themselves and .sucks registry Vox Populi.” In an earlier report, Domain Incite said “Vox Populi is taking ICANN to mediation over a row about what some of its registrars call a ‘gag order’ against them.”

“Commercial entities will not be excluded from buying domain privacy services, ICANN’s GNSO Council has confirmed,” Domain Incite is reporting. The Council last week “voted unanimously to approve a set of recommendations that would make it compulsory for privacy and proxy services to be accredited by ICANN for the first time.”

The .dk registry, DK Hostmaster, is implementing a new “self-service” option on 31 January. The option was originally scheduled to be effective as of 18 January.

Information is a bit sparse, but it appears the self-service functionality means registrants will be able to update a number of details to do with their domain without going through their registrar using a user ID and a password.

When registering a .dk domain, registrants can designate the proxy or payer (billing contact) or subsequently by using DK Hostmaster’s self-service.

Services that can be performed using this new service include request for delegation, changes to contact information, transferring to a third party, termination of a registration agreement and registration of DNSSEC.

More information on all the above can be found by following the links.

Controversial .SUCKS Lashes Out At ICANN Threatening Legal Action

The scourge of new gTLDs among brand owners has hit out at ICANN accusing it of making “false allegations” and disseminating “defamatory statements” against it. And they lay the blame for some of the highest prices for domain names squarely with ICANN, saying that everything they are doing was outlined in the application and contract for .sucks.The move follows a complaint from ICANN’s Intellectual Property Constituency that led to ICANN asking both the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and, because Vox Populi is a Canadian enterprise, Canada’s Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA), to consider assessing and determining whether or not Vox Populi is violating any of the laws or regulations those agencies enforce.And what could be seen as an attempt at a sugar-coated makeover, without really changing anything, the .sucks registry operator Vox Populi Registry has abandoned the .sucks “Sunrise Premium” brand in favour of a new “Market Premium” service, telling Domain Incite it ‘is just a renaming, designed to reduce confusion among trademark owners.’In a letter to ICANN from the .sucks registry operator’s law firm [see below], ICANN is accused of repeating and adopting “the ICANN IPC’s baseless allegations that Vox Populi has engaged in ‘illicit’ activities, and that Vox Populi’s practices are ‘predatory, exploitive and coercive.’ Your letter went even further, asking the FTC to investigate whether Vox Populi has engaged in any ‘illegal’ activities.””None of the letters in question identifies any manner in which any law might actually have been broken; instead they merely suggest (without explanation or logic) that Vox Populi’s pricing may lead to ‘cybersquatting’ that could damage trademark owners.”And later in the letter, the lawyers claim that:
“In sending these public letters, and making the false allegations contained therein, ICANN has disseminated defamatory statements about Vox Populi and its business practices aimed at depriving Vox Populi of the benefits of its contract with ICANN. These actions further violate the duty of good faith and fair dealing that is implied in every contract. They also contravene ICANN’s own policies and statements of purpose. Finally, in suggesting illegality without any basis whatsoever, your actions (and those of the ICANN IPC and ICANN BC) have given rise to defamation claims against ICANN. Vox Populi hereby demands that ICANN, including any and all of its subdivisions, cease any and all such activity immediately.”The letter notes the registry wanted to make money out of brands through some of the highest Sunrise fees but blames this squarely at ICANN’s feet.”In accordance with the decisions that ICANN itself made, Vox Populi may set the price for these registrations to capture such value and at a level that the market will bear. Regardless of ICANN’s inflammatory characterizations of Vox Populi’s pricing, these prices, and the manner in which they were set, in no way violate Vox Populi’s contract with ICANN or any laws.”The letter concludes:
To be clear, Vox Populi has no interest in pursuing claims at this time. We believe that the FTC and the OCA will recognize quickly that there are simply no factual allegations that warrant any investigation and that ICANN has identified no laws or regulations under the FTC’s or the OCA’s purview that have been violated in any way. As a result, it is our hope that your letter has merely resulted in some passing, unfortunate publicity. However, if ICANN or any of its constituent bodies (or any directly responsible member thereof) engages in any further wrongful activity that prevents the company from fulfilling its contractual obligations and operating the .SUCKS registry as both ICANN and Vox Populi envisioned, the company will have no choice but to pursue any and all remedies available to it.””This letter is written reserving all rights, and does not constitute a waiver of any claims for past actions taken by ICANN or any committee or division thereof.”The letter has been reproduced in full below:May 11, 2015John O. Jeffrey
General Counsel & Secretary
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094Re: Vox Populi Registry AgreementDear Mr. Jeffrey,This firm represents ICANN’s contractual partner, Vox Populi Registry (“Vox Populi”). I write regarding your letter to The Honorable Edith Ramirez, the Chairwoman of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), and The Honorable John Knubley, the Deputy Minister of Canada’s Office of Consumer Affairs (“OCA”), dated April 9, 2015, which forwarded a complaint letter from the ICANN Intellectual Property Constituency (“ICANN IPC”), and repeated and adopted the ICANN IPC’s baseless allegations that Vox Populi has engaged in “illicit” activities, and that Vox Populi’s practices are “predatory, exploitive and coercive.” Your letter went even further, asking the FTC to investigate whether Vox Populi has engaged in any “illegal” activities. More recently, ICANN’s Business Constituency (“ICANN BC”) sent letters to Ms. Ramirez and Mr. Knubley, as well as to Akram Atallah, President of ICANN’s Global Domains Division, which further republished and expanded upon these allegations.None of the letters in question identifies any manner in which any law might actually have been broken; instead they merely suggest (without explanation or logic) that Vox Populi’s pricing may lead to “cybersquatting” that could damage trademark owners. At the same time, though, the ICANN IPC’s letter expressly recognizes that registrations on Vox Populi’s .SUCKS registry are subject to ICANN’s various trademark dispute resolution processes, which protect trademark owners from cybersquatting. And although the ICANN BC letter to the FTC and the OCA asserts that ICANN “does not wish to limit free speech or prevent criticism of any business,” the only coherent expression of any potential concern is that businesses may feel compelled to register their trademarks “to defend [their] reputation from critics or competitors controlling their brand domain in .sucks and using it unfairly to criticize their products or services.” To the extent such competitive use or criticism is unfair, trademark owners have a full complement of remedies that they can seek both through ICANN’s dispute procedures and the laws of various different nations. As a result, it would seem that ICANN is not actually concerned about cybersquatting or any other illegal activity. Rather, ICANN appears concerned that registrations on the .SUCKS registry will be used to aggregate uncomplimentary commentary about companies and products–the very purpose for the registry that Vox Populi identified in the application it submitted to ICANN, and that ICANN approved.In sending these public letters, and making the false allegations contained therein, ICANN has disseminated defamatory statements about Vox Populi and its business practices aimed at depriving Vox Populi of the benefits of its contract with ICANN. These actions further violate the duty of good faith and fair dealing that is implied in every contract. They also contravene ICANN’s own policies and statements of purpose. Finally, in suggesting illegality without any basis whatsoever, your actions (and those of the ICANN IPC and ICANN BC) have given rise to defamation claims against ICANN. Vox Populi hereby demands that ICANN, including any and all of its subdivisions, cease any and all such activity immediately.As you know, on December 22, 2014, ICANN and Vox Populi entered into a contract under which ICANN voluntarily granted Vox Populi the fight to operate the registry for ICANN’s .SUCKS top level domain (“TLD”) in exchange for financial compensation. The benefits of having a .SUCKS TLD have been recognized by consumer advocates for more than a decade. As early as 2000, well known consumer rights champions such as Ralph Nader and James Love petitioned ICANN to create a .SUCKS TLD, arguing that “[t]his TLD will be used to facilitate criticism of a firm or organization, such as aol.sucks, wipo.sucks, or even greenpeace.sucks …. The domain would also be available for other uses, such as work.sucks, life.sucks, or television.sucks.” The concept of a TLD that facilitates and aggregates legitimate complaints about companies and organizations is entirely consistent with the policies and stated goals of ICANN and the Internet community. As Mr. Nader noted fifteen years ago, it has always been understood that “the .sucks TLD will be offensive to some people,” but it has nonetheless been recognized that the creation of the .SUCKS TLD will be beneficial because it will promote “free speech rights of individuals and small organizations.”And, of course, ICANN was fully aware of the goals and purpose of the .SUCKS registry when it entered into its contractual relationship with Vox Populi. Indeed, Vox Populi stated the purpose of the .SUCKS registry expressly in its registry application:The term “sucks” resonates around the globe, its intention is clear and understood. But it is now more than an epithet; it is a call to action. Whether registered by an activist or an executive, this new landscape will be devoted to encouraging an accelerated and legitimate dialog that can lead to improved customer satisfaction and market share.There are few, if any, places for raw consumer commentary and corporate interests to cohere. The .SUCKS name space will enable the benefits of a dialogue without dampening its usual initial vehemence. With its specific focus, it will make it even easier for consumers to find, suggest, cajole, complain and engage on specific products, services and companies.
Vox Populi recognized the tensions that a registry specifically targeted to channeling consumer complaints might create. As a consequence, it was careful to include in its application provisions to address any concerns about abuse by registrants. As required by ICANN’s application procedures, Vox Populi agreed to comply with ICANN’s Uniform Dispute Resolution Procedures (“UDRP”), Uniform Rapid Suspension System (“URS”), trademark post- delegation dispute resolution procedure (“Trademark PDDRP”), and Sunrise Dispute Resolution System, each of which has been designed and implemented by ICANN to address those circumstances where a trademark owner believes that a registrant or a registration has infringed its rights or used a domain improperly. As a result, trademark owners are protected from abuse on the .SUCKS registry to the exact same degree that they are on any other registry.Beyond that, Vox Populi voluntarily adopted policies to immediately address any registrant that uses a registration to engage in bullying. It implemented policies banning pornography on the .SUCKS registry, and it specifically adopted a “no parking policy” to prevent registrants from registering domains without making active use of the site. In all respects, Vox Populi has been scrupulous in implementing policies that are designed to advance the very goals that have been recognized as beneficial for the Internet community for more than a decade.ICANN reviewed Vox Populi’s application and approved it. ICANN also reviewed Vox Populi’s launch plan and sunrise policies, approved them as well, and provided a launch schedule on which Vox Populi has relied.In addition, ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), which includes as a member a senior policy advisor in the US Department of Commerce–the governmental agency that has overseen ICANN since its inception–specifically reviewed and commented on Vox Populi’s registry application. The GAC’s only comment was that ICANN should require the other applicants for the .SUCKS registry to include the non-bullying clause that Vox Populi already had in its application. In essence, the GAC recognized that Vox Populi’s application went above and beyond what was appropriate and responsible.Based on the extensive review of Vox Populi’s application, ICANN entered into a contract with the company to manage the .SUCKS registry. In entering into this agreement, Vox Populi understood the value of the .SUCKS registry–both the value to the Internet community as an outlet for open discussion, and the value to Vox Populi as a business. Multiple parties submitted applications to obtain the .SUCKS registry, an auction was conducted among those qualified applicants, and Vox Populi’s successful bid was based on its appraisal of that value and the assumption that ICANN would not interfere in its ability to manage the registry in accordance with its contractual obligations. The registry agreement itself contains specific financial obligations that Vox Populi is required to meet. And, as with all new TLD registries, ICANN made a specific, considered decision not to regulate the price at which domain names would be sold. In a recent response letter to the President of the ICANN IPC, Akram Atallah, the President of ICANN’s Global Domains Division, noted that the imposition of price restrictions on new TLDs like the .SUCKS registry would be detrimental to the Internet.As you will recall, there was extensive discussion of whether price caps or controls should be included in new gTLD registry agreements when the new gTLD program was formulated. In furtherance of such discussions, ICANN engaged an expert economic consultant to study the issue. The expert concluded that price caps or ceilings were not necessary or desirable, that the imposition of price caps might inhibit the development and marketplace acceptance of new gTLDs, and that trademark holders’ rights could be protected through alternate rights protection mechanisms, such as the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS), the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), or trademark post-delegation dispute resolution procedure (Trademark PDDRP) you reference in your letter. Both before and after the study was released, this issue was thoroughly discussed and debated by members of the global multistakeholder community, and ultimately the determination was made not to impose price caps or price controls in the new gTLD registry agreements.Consistent with both its contractual rights, and with the policy conclusions outlined in the study conducted by ICANN’s own economic consultant, Vox Populi has priced the domains on the .SUCKS registry at levels that it believes are consistent with market value. Specifically, during the sunrise period, Vox Populi charges registrars $1999 for each domain registered on the .SUCKS registry, with a suggested retail price of $2499. Registrars are, of course, free to set the ultimate price to registrants as they see fit. Currently in the market, there are registrars selling domains for as low as $2024 and as high as $3977.99. Once the sunrise period has passed, Vox Populi will wholesale most .SUCKS domains to registrars at $199, with a suggested retail price of $249. Again, registrars will decide the retail price as they see fit. As with virtually all new TLD registries, these prices are set above the costs incurred by Vox Populi in operating the registry.The prices for a.SUCKS registration are higher than those set by many other registries (though not all), particularly with respect to the sunrise period. In its registry application, Vox Populi recognized that a trademark owner’s .SUCKS domain would be of significant value to a trademark owner to allow consumers to voice their concerns and engage in constructive dialogue with dissatisfied consumers. The original proposal for the formation of a.SUCKS registry put forward by consumer advocates would have banned companies from owning their own trademarks on the registry. In accordance with ICANN’s Rights Protection Mechanism, however, Vox Populi has permitted trademark owners to purchase their trademarks as domains, and has granted those trademark owners the exclusive right to purchase their trademarks as domains during the mandatory sunrise period. In its application, Vox Populi noted that, “[b]y building an easy-to-locate, ‘central town square’ available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, the .SUCKS registry will become a recognized destination not just for [] one company, but for all. It will give assurances to customers that their voice can be heard. And it can become an essential part of every company’s customer relationship management program.” In this way, the .SUCKS registry provides significant value to those trademark owners who wish to avail themselves of the opportunity to register their trademark as a domain. In accordance with the decisions that ICANN itself made, Vox Populi may set the price for these registrations to capture such value and at a level that the market will bear. Regardless of ICANN’s inflammatory characterizations of Vox Populi’s pricing, these prices, and the manner in which they were set, in no way violate Vox Populi’s contract with ICANN or any laws.Notwithstanding the fact that Vox Populi has operated in every respect in accordance with the letter, spirit, and intent of its agreement with ICANN, the ICANN IPC sent an inflammatory letter filled with spurious allegations to the president of ICANN’s Global Domains Division, and you endorsed and forwarded that letter to the FTC. More recently, ICANN’s BC sent similar letters to the Global Domains Division, as well at the FTC and the OPC. These letters contain too many factual misrepresentations to catalogue, but in the end they accuse Vox Populi of operating a “predatory scheme” that somehow makes it more likely that trademark owners’ names will be registered by “cybersquatters.” Of course, the argument makes no sense, because to the extent that a trademark owner’s brand is registered as a domain by a cybersquatter, that trademark owner can avail itself of the remedies Vox Populi has provided through ICANN’s own UDRP, URS or Trademark TDDRP procedures. As a result, it seems clear that ICANN is not concerned with trademark infringement or cybersquatting (for which everyone agrees there exist ready remedies), but is actually concerned that the .SUCKS registry may be used for the very purpose ICANN already approved–namely (as outlined in Vox Populi’s registry application), “to create a new address on the web that will give voice to consumers,” to provide a forum “for raw consumer commentary,” and to “make it even easier for consumers to find, suggest, cajole, complain and engage on specific products, services and companies.”As Vox Populi’s contractual partner and the regulatory entity that approved of the stated purposes of the .SUCKS registry, upon receipt of the ICANN IPC complaint letter, ICANN’s appropriate response should have been to respond to the ICANN IPC and ask for some specific basis for the complaints. At the very least, it would have been appropriate to forward the complaint letter to Vox Populi to give the company the opportunity to respond before taking any action based on the allegations. Unfortunately, ICANN took neither of these reasonable actions. Instead, ICANN forwarded the defamatory allegations to the FTC and the OCA, in the process endorsing the allegations and further asserting that Vox Populi has engaged in “illicit,” “illegal” activity that has been “predatory, exploitive and coercive.” Your letter identifies no law that has been broken, no regulation that has been transgressed, and no contractual provision that has been breached. Rather, it makes broad, sweeping allegations without any factual support, and republishes the falsehoods of the ICANN IPC’s initial complaint letter. The ICANN BC letters cite statutory provisions, but offer no explanations as to how Vox Populi’s actions in any way transgress those provisions. And while the ICANN BC suggests that Vox Populi has violated its agreement with ICANN, it sites to no contractual obligation or provision that it alleges has been violated.As I am sure you are aware, every contractual relationship carries with it an implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing. Digerati Holdings, LLC v. Young Money Entm ‘t, LLC, 194 Cal. App. 4th 873, 885, 123 Cal. Rptr. 3d 736, 745 (2011) (“Every contract contains an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing providing that no party to the contract will do anything that would deprive another party of the benefits of the contract.”). In this instance, notwithstanding the fact that Vox Populi has fulfilled every aspect of its obligations, and operated fully within the expectations of the parties, ICANN has chosen to take action to harm Vox Populi’s ability to operate within the registry agreement and has breached its obligation to conduct itself in good faith. In addition, ICANN’s actions are in contravention of its stated core values and policies. For example, in Article 3 of Vox Populi’s registry agreement, ICANN covenanted that, “[c]onsistent with ICANN’s expressed mission and core values, ICANN shall operate in an open and transparent manner.” It is hard to consider ICANN in compliance with this covenant when one of its internal constituencies writes a complaint letter to one of the organization’s divisions about Vox Populi, and an officer in another section of the organization forwards that letter asking for an investigation into “illegal” activity without even seeking a response from Vox Populi first. Finally, ICANN’s actions constitute defamation and trade libel that are fully actionable outside of the arbitration provisions of the registry agreement. Goldline, LLC v. Regal Assets, LLC, 2015 WL 1809301, at * 5 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 21, 2015) (Commercial disparagement or defamation specifically involves injury to the reputation of a business rather than disparagement of quality of goods or services.). Indeed, these concerns are heightened by the fact that the ICANN IPC is made up, in part, of owners of other registries that will be competing with the .SUCKS registry.We hereby demand that ICANN refrain from taking any further action in the future to impede Vox Populi’s ability to operate the new TLD .SUCKS registry in accordance with its contractual rights and obligations. To the extent that ICANN, the ICANN IPC or any other ICANN constituencies engage in any further wrongful activities designed to injure Vox Populi, or prevent the operation of the registry, the company will take any and all actions necessary to protect its rights.To be clear, Vox Populi has no interest in pursuing claims at this time. We believe that the FTC and the OCA will recognize quickly that there are simply no factual allegations that warrant any investigation and that ICANN has identified n___o_o laws or regulations under the FTC’s or the OCA’s purview that have been violated in any way. As a result, it is our hope that your letter has merely resulted in some passing, unfortunate publicity. However, if ICANN or any of its constituent bodies (or any directly responsible member thereof) engages in any further wrongful activity that prevents the company from fulfilling its contractual obligations and operating the .SUCKS registry as both ICANN and Vox Populi envisioned, the company will have no choice but to pursue any and all remedies available to it.This letter is written reserving all rights, and does not constitute a waiver of any claims for past actions taken by ICANN or any committee or division thereof.Sincerely,
R. David HospCc:Mr . Akram Atallah, President, Global Domains Divisions, ICANN
Mr . Cherine Chalaby, Chair, Board New gTLD Program Committee, ICANN
Mr . Fadi Chehad6, President and Chief Executive Officer, ICANN
Mr. Steve Crocker, Chair, Board of Directors, ICANN
Mr . Allen Grogan, Chief Contract Compliance Officer, ICANN
TheHonorable Edith Ramirez, Chairwoman, United States Federal Trade Commission The Honorable Pamela Miller, Representative for Canada, Government Advisory Committee, ICANN
The Honorable Suzanne Radell, Representative for United States of America, Government Advisory Committee, ICANN
The Honorable John Knubley, Deputy Minister, Canada’s Office of Consumer Affairs The Honorable Thomas Schneider, Chair, Govemment Advisory Committee, ICANN
The Honorable Lawrence Stickling, Assistance Secretary for Communications and Information and Administrator, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)

ICANN Asks US and Canadian Regulators to Consider if .SUCKS Violates Laws

There has been widespread outrage from brand owners as to the business model of the .sucks gTLD with fears the gTLD will turn into a forum for registrants to “bash-a-brand.” And now following a complaint from ICANN’s Intellectual Property Constituency [pdf], ICANN has asked both the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and, because Vox Populi is a Canadian enterprise, Canada’s Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA), to consider assessing and determining whether or not Vox Populi is violating any of the laws or regulations those agencies enforce.ICANN is currently evaluating remedies available to them under the registry agreement. Should Vox Populi not be complying with all applicable laws, it may also be in breach of its registry agreement allowing ICANN to take action itself, acting consistently with its public interest goals and consumer and business protections to change these practices through our contractual relationship with the registry.Greg Shatan, president of the IPC, whose letter on 27 March sparked ICANN’s outreach to the FTC and OCA, spoke to Domain Incite and said the word “justice” is more appropriate than “appeasement”.”We’re looking forward to the FTC and OCA taking a look at Vox Populi’s behaviour,” Shatan told Domain Incite. “And there’s lots to look at. The punitive TMCH Sunrise, where a ‘rights protection mechanism’ intended to protect trademark owners has been turned into a scheme to extort $2,500 and up… The eternal Sunrise Premium of the far-from-spotless .SUCKS registry. The mysterious ‘everybody.sucks’ — purportedly a third party, purportedly providing a ‘subsidy’ to registrant — would anyone be surprised if that was a sham?With reference to the FTC referral, Shatan also told Domain Incite that “I don’t think ICANN wants to waste the FTC’s time. It’s far more rational to think that ICANN informed the FTC because Vox Populi’s activities are within the jurisdiction of the FTC. Mr. Berard’s remarks seem to indicate that he believes that Vox Populi operates beyond the reach of US laws.””With a tech contact in Bermuda and an admin contact in the Caymans, that may have been Vox Pop’s intention. Vox Pop may be operating outside US laws, but I doubt they are operating beyond their reach.”The issue, the IPC believes, needs to be considered urgently as the .sucks Sunrise period was slated to open on 30 March and that Vox Populi will “charge trademark owners $2,499 and up to register domain names in the TMCH Sunrise period” was one of their concerns. “Vox Populi’s incredibly high fees will prevent many trademark owners from being able to take advantage of the TMCH Sunrise period.”The “illicit scheme doesn’t stop there” though according to the IPC. “If a trademark owner decides that it will sit out the Sunrise Period and attempt to register its trademark as a domain name during general availability for $249, it still may be forced to pay at least $2,499. This is because Vox Populi has now introduced its ‘Sunrise Premium’ list. (Despite the name, ‘Sunrise Premium’ pricing applies only during general availability.) If a trademark is on the Sunrise Premium list, it will always be at least $2,499 per year. The Sunrise Premium list is a list of strings compiled by Vox Populi from strings registered or blocked in other TLDs’ sunrise periods.”According to the IPC, “Vox Populi’s strategy is obvious-to ensure that those trademark owners who have invested in protecting those trademarks by registering in the TMCH and registering domain names in other sunrise periods, and who are most likely to want to protect their trademarks by registering in .SUCKS, cannot avoid paying at least $2,499 per year, no matter when they register.”

.SUCKS Does Not Serve Public Interest And Is A Predatory Shakedown Scheme: Rockefeller to ICANN

Senator Jay RockefellerThe only apparent purpose of the .sucks gTLD is to extract “defensive registration” payments from internet users, and unfairly defame individuals, non-profit organisations and businesses said John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV in a letter to ICANN.

In his letter Rockefeller, Chairman of the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, wrote that approving the pending gTLD for .sucks will force businesses and non-profits to pay ongoing fees to third parties to avoid having their names associated with the new gTLD.

“As a committed supporter of the multi-stakeholder model of global internet governance, I feel a responsibility to speak up when I see ICANN considering steps that could damage its reputation,” Rockefeller wrote. “A gTLD like ‘sucks’ has little or no socially redeeming value and it reinforces many people’s fears that the purpose of gTLD expansion is to enrich the domain name industry rather than benefit the broader community of Internet users. In my opinion, it is not in the public interest to approve this gTLD.”

Rockefeller is a supporter of the new gTLD programme having chaired a 2011 Senate Commerce Committee hearing titled, “ICANN’s Expansion of Top Level Domains”, where he noted its potential to increase choice and competition but highlighted that “the potential for fraud, consumer confusion, and cybersquatting is massive and argues for a phased-in implementation.”

There are three applicants for .sucks – Donuts, Momentous Corporation and Top Level Spectrum – who Rockefeller notes claim the gTLD will “foster debate and benefit consumers.” But Rockefeller views the gTLD “as little more than a predatory shakedown scheme.”

The letter to ICANN has been published here.