- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Issues Report on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Date
by At-Large Staff Jan. 6, 2009

Jan. 6, 2009

Dear all, The Issues Report on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery, which was requested by the ALAC is now available in the five UN languages under http://gnso.icann.org/policies/. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Marie-Hélène Bouchoms, Heidi Ullrich ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Guide to creating response to new gTLD workbook
by Brendler, Beau Jan. 5, 2009

Jan. 5, 2009

Greetings. Several people worked on this since Cairo, so rather than holding on to it any longer I wanted to send it out to a broad group. It's a sort of guide to creating a draft document response to the new gTLD workbook. Only a guide! It's meant to be read in conjunction with the document itself to suggest areas in which the user community might want to elaborate (or not). For it to be most useful you still need the workbook document handy. For instance, there are things we've since discussed on various lists that aren't in this guide, for instance, from Danny: "Working one's way through module 2 (the Applicant Information Form section), there is one question that is glaringly missing: "Indicate whether (i) the applicant or any of its (ii) officers, (iii) directors, or (iv) managers: a. within the past ten years, has been convicted of a felony or of a misdemeanor related to financial activities, or has been judged by a court to have committed fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, or has been the subject of a judicial determination that is similar or related to any of these; b. within the past ten years, has been disciplined by the government of its, her, or his domicile for conduct involving dishonesty or misuse of funds of others; c. is currently involved in any judicial or regulatory proceeding that could result in a conviction, judgment, determination, or discipline of the type specified in (a) or (b); or d. is the subject of a disqualification imposed by ICANN and in effect at the time of this application. So, for instance, we should decide where we want to put that in. In addition to some of the NCUC comments I have sent out over the last 24 hours or so, here are some URLs of others' perspectives on new gTLDs. International Olympic Committee: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gtld-guide/pdf2Skbh839Jy.pdf Registry Constituency: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gtld-guide/docnZV8Xn1mmo.doc IDN Comment: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gtld-guide/msg00055.html Robin Gross: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gtld-guide/msg00034.html Wendy Chan: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gtld-guide/msg00043.html Unicode Technical Committee: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gtld-guide/msg00021.html Ron Andruff: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gtld-string/msg00001.html After the call on Friday, I would like to propose a time for the working group to meet and discuss its responses to the attached document, to the discussion on the lists, and other matters, so that we can work up a statement by the deadline, which I believe has now been extended to Jan. 7 (we will clarify this in Friday's meeting). Staff, may I ask that you translate this message into French and Spanish and distribute it so that we can get maximum community involvement. Thanks Beau Brendler ** This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.

2 1

Re: [At-Large] [GTLD-WG] my submissions to new gTLD statement
by Bill Silverstein Jan. 4, 2009

Jan. 4, 2009

John L said: >My advice would be to stop the new gTLD process until: > b) ICANN develops and implements compliance processes to manage *all* of > the requirements in existing registry and registrar contracts, and > develops compliance processes for any new or different requirements in new > contracts. I partially agree. I would like to wait until, ICANN actually demonstrates that they have reliably enforced compliance. ICANN has consistently demonstrated that they have Just having rules and process does not mean that it has been enforced. See http://www.icann.org/correspondence/touton-letter-to-beckwith-03sep02.htm . The domain names in questions stayed invalid until they switched to a privacy service provider.

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten Jan. 2, 2009

Jan. 2, 2009

Total of 5 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jan 2 00:53:02 EST 2009 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 40.00% | 2 | 43.09% | 14139 | dannyyounger at yahoo.com 20.00% | 1 | 21.40% | 7024 | jefsey at jefsey.com 20.00% | 1 | 17.95% | 5889 | joly at punkcast.com 20.00% | 1 | 17.56% | 5763 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 5 |100.00% | 32815 | Total

1 0

Top Ten ALAC Accomplishments of 2008
by Danny Younger Jan. 1, 2009

Jan. 1, 2009

Every year at this time one can find a variety of top ten lists ranging from the top 10 news stories to the top 10 worst-dressed celebrities. Looking back on this year we should be asking ourselves, what are the top ten ALAC accomplishments of 2008? What new policies have we helped to put into place that will benefit the user community? Did we offer any policy suggestions regarding proxy registrations? Did we offer up policy to deal with domain name warehousing? Did we propose policy to prohibit domain name front-running? Did we examine provisions in registry agreements dealing with abusive registrations? Did we come up with a proposal to balance the WHOIS privacy rights of natural persons with disclosure needs? Did we recommend any policy changes to deal with the fast flux issues? Did we review any transfer policy proposals? Did we propose any new policy to speed the adoption of IPv6? Did we arrive at any expedited domain name take-down procedures that would facilitate dealing with phishing? Did we come up with a way to minimize UDRP-related costs? Did we consider ways to minimize the need for defensive registrations in a new gTLD environment? Did we come up with policy to address the direct transfer clauses in registrar terms of service agreements? Did we propose any studies? Did we request that research be commissioned on any topic? Did we initiate any consumer protection initiatives? let's hope that 2009 is a better year

2 1

Another Cybersquatting Registrar
by Danny Younger Dec. 27, 2008

Dec. 27, 2008

ICANN accredited registrar OnlineNIC "unlawfully registered at least 663 domain names that were either identical to or confusingly similar to Verizon trademarks". A federal court in the Northern District of California calculated an award based on $50,000 per domain name and awarded Verizon $33.15 million. http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2008/12/22/daily39.html Thanks to George Kirikos for bringing this news to our attention on the GA list. Now we will wait and see what, if any, action ICANN takes. As George notes: OnlineNIC is a top 20 registrar with more than 1 million domains under management: http://www.registrarstats.com/Public/RegistrarMarketShareMain.aspx Meanwhile, I have asked ICANN Staff to look into whether Daniel Sundin, the head of Red Register (another ICANN accredited registrar and a recent recipient of an ICANN Breach Notice), is the same Daniel Sundin cited in a recent FTC complaint that dealt with a massive "scareware" scheme, which falsely claimed that scans had detected viruses, spyware, and illegal pornography on consumers’ computers. see http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0723137/index.shtm

2 2

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten Dec. 26, 2008

Dec. 26, 2008

Total of 13 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Dec 26 00:53:02 EST 2008 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 23.08% | 3 | 30.82% | 31879 | ajp at glocom.ac.jp 23.08% | 3 | 15.61% | 16150 | dannyyounger at yahoo.com 15.38% | 2 | 10.51% | 10871 | evan at telly.org 7.69% | 1 | 14.82% | 15326 | vanda at uol.com.br 7.69% | 1 | 11.88% | 12284 | baptista at publicroot.org 7.69% | 1 | 6.02% | 6223 | narten at us.ibm.com 7.69% | 1 | 5.45% | 5640 | patrick at vande-walle.eu 7.69% | 1 | 4.89% | 5057 | langdonorr at gmail.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 13 |100.00% | 103430 | Total

1 0

Seasonal Greetings to All
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Dec. 24, 2008

Dec. 24, 2008

Wishing all of you on this at-large mailing and discusion list all the Very Best of the Season, and to those of you who may be taking a break away from your daily work, I trust you will have a safe, happy and healthy time with LOTS of much earned rest... Kindest regards -- Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO)

1 0

Best wishes from ISOC Luxembourg
by Patrick Vande Walle Dec. 23, 2008

Dec. 23, 2008

Dear colleagues, It has been a pleasure working with you during the past year. We wish you and your dear ones a very happy New Year. "Cheers to a New Year and another chance for us to get it right." (Oprah Winfrey) Patrick Vande Walle http://members.isoc.lu/greetings/images/ecards/fullsize/img_a4dfd043isoc-wh…

1 0

Fw: [ga] NTIA/DoC and DoJ bitch slap ICANN over new gTLDs!!!
by Danny Younger Dec. 19, 2008

Dec. 19, 2008

forwarded from the GA list: --- On Fri, 12/19/08, George Kirikos <gkirikos(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > From: George Kirikos <gkirikos(a)yahoo.com> > Subject: [ga] NTIA/DoC and DoJ bitch slap ICANN over new gTLDs!!! > To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org > Date: Friday, December 19, 2008, 2:21 PM > Hi folks, > > I'm still reading their letter dated yesterday, but > it's wonderful that > they appear to see that ICANN is going in the wrong > direction on new > gTLDs: > > [url]http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/2008/ICANN_081218.pdf[/url] > > (be sure to read the entire 11 pages, as it includes stuff > from the DoJ > after the first letter) > > More from Reuters at: > > [url]http://uk.reuters.com/article/technologyNewsMolt/idUKTRE4BI4WR20081219?…] > > Sincerely, > > George Kirikos > http://www.leap.com/

2 2