Hello All: I'm here in the interest of Landcruise.COM; and all the ACPA's { supposedly protected } Mark, Trade Name and Trademark dotCOM Registrants. My objective is to ensure that the American ACPA ~ 15 U.S. Code § 1125 - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden ~ is the exclusive resource for enterprises to defend their Businesses Brand identities; and the related Marks, Trade Names and Trademarks in Cyberspace and "real world" commerce. I'm NOT American, so those outside the United States can't say I'm "pro America". Like so many outside the USofA, I find Article 1, Section 8 to be amusing, with "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;" That observation aside, I'm Canadian; and for the most part, have no problems with US Law governing .COM's Marks, Trade Names and Trademarks, as their law's mirror ours here in Canada, via NAFTA, as they, the American's, copy English Law, as does the civilized world. Because, The United States use "Common Law" and participate in the Madrid System's ... "one stop solution for registering and managing marks worldwide." all business who use The United States Department of Commerces ~ Global Top Level Domain .COM ~ gain due protection in contemporary terms, under / via .COM when meeting the "In Use" requirements of the USPTO. Here linked are the countries where .COM equals "1st in Use" > http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/treaties/en/documents/pdf/madrid_marks.... < Lets remember: The Commerce Department through NTIA gave ICANN the contract / mandate to develop NEW gTLDs and manage the Domain Name System overall, therefore, because the MoU contracted ICANN to enhance the DNS, American "1st in Use" law applies to all the NEW gTLDs in Cyberspace and Everywhere. Therefore, all the Worlds-wide-web business using .COM are bonafide "1st in Use". Further, all .COM Domain Name Registrants are empowered to oblige ICANN to treat the NEW gTLDs as "media outlets" so us simple, lowly Domain Name Registrants may dictate who uses their Mark, Trade Name & Trademark in all "media outlets" when that "word mark" is used for Goods & Services which are "confusingly similar" in classification to what our respective business do. In closing, the RMP, Trademark Clearing House and UDRP, etc, etc ICANN "cash grabs" issue's are redundant. As are the "Alternative" or "Supplementary" forms of UDRP concocted for CentralNic to e~VaED the Lanham Act. Here's my profile: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Graham+Schreiber+SOI I look forward to chatting more. Regards, Graham Schreiber.