Dear Akinbo -

ICANN’s role in relation to any gTLD registry is over the enforcement of the registry’s contract with ICANN.  In your question below, ICANN would typically only get involved if there was a complaint that the registry was violating the terms of its agreement with ICANN. The agreements for the gTLDs delegated through the New gTLD Program do not include any terms relating to minimum or maximum prices for registrations; ICANN similarly does not have contractual terms on the pricing practices of its accredited registrars. The ability for registered name holders to be sued for the content they have on their website is also not something that ICANN has a say in.  There are, however, avenues that are made available, such as the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Process, a policy developed by the ICANN community (though ICANN is not a party to UDRP proceedings) as well as some of the other resolution processes that were developed within the New gTLD Program that could be applicable to particular types of complaints or disputes.  

Best, 

Samantha


From: Adebunmi AKINBO <akinbo@nira.org.ng>
Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 at 4:16 PM
To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>
Cc: "accountability-cross-community@icann.org" <accountability-cross-community@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Another Twist to Law, Jurisdiction and Accountability

All,
Back to the .sucks.

I have a question.
If ICANN is not regulatory and the registrant feels cheated if within 2 years the price changes to peanuts, can ICANN interfere if requested to handle the issue ? Can a government feel insulted to ban the use of this gTLD against its geographic names and sue the registrar? Can a company sue for defamation of character ?

A scenario.
A website with a name like usa.suks or china.sucks or icann sucks comes up.
Someone feels bad and takes a negative action.
What would be ICANN roles ?

Curious for a response with direction.
-Akinbo.


On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Paul, that is a new twist to "be careful what you wish for...."  :-)

Greg

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:

My bad and poor writing.  I actually meant the exact opposite – i.e. that I think we all wish that ICANN continue to NOT have regulatory authority.  Apologies to all for the lack of clarity.

 

Paul

 

 

From: Steve Crocker [mailto:steve@shinkuro.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 1:48 PM
To: Paul Rosenzweig Esq
Cc: Stephen D. Crocker; accountability-cross-community@icann.org
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Another Twist to Law, Jurisdiction and Accountability

 

Paul,

 

Did you actually say, rephrasing for clarity, “We all will continue to wish for ICANN to have regulatory authority”?

 

If so, that’s a very strong statement, whose implication is probably not fully understood by everyone and, when understood, may not at all be what everyone wishes for.

 

Steve

 

On Apr 14, 2015, at 12:41 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:



All

 

As you may know, ICANN recently created the new gTLD .sucks.   It appears that the new registry manager, Vox Populi, is charging a rather exorbitant fee of $2500/year for existing trademarks to purchase the relevant domain name in the pre-release Sunrise period.   Some have protested to ICANN about this.  ICANN’s response is interesting and may have relevance to our accountability discussion.  It seems (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/04/09/the-group-that-created-sucks-now-wants-government-to-keep-it-from-spinning-out-of-control/) that ICANN has asked the regulatory authorities in the US and Canada to determine whether or not Vox Populi’s pricing is predatory under US and Canadian law (and thus illegal).

 

I am not at all clear whether ICANN has directed this request to those national authorities because it is where they are located or, more likely, because they are the law specified by the underlying contracts.  But it does suggest that, in the absence of regulatory authority for ICANN (which I assume we all will continue to wish for) national laws will continue to play a role.  I am not in the least bit sure how this plays into our discussions – but it certainly seems a relevant confounding factor we ought to be aware of

 

Paul

 

Paul Rosenzweig

Red Branch Consulting, PLLC

509 C St. NE

Washington, DC 20002

Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066

Link to my PGP Key

 

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

 


_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community



_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community