RIAA Threatening ICANN About .music; Claiming It Will Be Used To Infringe

from the when-you're-an-organization-of-lawyers... dept

Oh look, the RIAA is overreacting yet again -- and doing so the only way it knows how: by rolling out the legal threats. This time it's threatening ICANN over its new top level domain program, which allows all sorts of new TLDs to be registered -- including planned proposals for a .music domain. But the RIAA isn't happy about this, because:

We are concerned that a music themed gTLD will be used to enable wide scale copyright and trademark infringement.

I'm sort of at a loss how the specific TLD makes any difference whatsoever in enabling infringement. A website's a website, no matter what the TLD is. How will having a new TLD enable any more infringement at all? It seems like the real goal of this is (of course) to get ICANN to act as a copyright cop for any such TLD. Just as the RIAA has sought to make copyright cops out of ISPs, the government and other third parties, now it's seeking help from ICANN, who hopefully knows better. So it suggests that it would like to "work with ICANN... to ensure this type of malicious behavior does not occur."

And, of course, in typical RIAA fashion, if ICANN says no, the RIAA plans to go legal:

We strongly urge you to take these concerns seriously... we prefer a practical solution to these issues, and hope to avoid the need to escalate the issue further.

I'd love to see the RIAA try to "escalate the issue further." What's it going to do? Is any court really going to go so far as to say that just because something that has not yet been created, and might possibly in some weird stretch of the imagination be used for infringement, that ICANN has to block it?

Filed Under: domains, icann, music, riaa, tlds, top level domains
Companies: icann, riaa

What Would Happen If Wikileaks Got Its Own Top Level Domain?

from the a-freedom-tld? dept

With all the talk about how the whole Wikileaks/domain name seizures issue is about a centralized vs. decentralized internet and even talk of a more decentralized DNS system, IP Watch raises an interesting question. With ICANN's plans to allow just about any TLD, what would happen if Wikileaks were to apply for its very own TLD?

Given ICANN's official statement that it does not take down domain names and has no technical or legal authority to participate in such forms of censorship (and, in fact, we've noted in the past that ICANN has refused to meet with IP Czar Victoria Espinel about this, noting that it would not be appropriate), would it allow such a TLD to be created, and then take a hands off approach?

What if it wasn't even a .wikileaks (or just .leaks) TLD, but a more general .open DNS, managed by an organization that agreed not to censor anything, no matter what the cause?

Filed Under: dns system, icann, openness, tld, top level domain, wikileaks
Companies: icann, wikileaks

Olympics Continues Threatening ICANN Because It Won't Block All Olympics-Related Terms

from the fetchez-la-vache dept

We've established the weird fact that various countries seem to blatantly ignore the basic principles of copyright and trademark laws within their own countries to grant the Olympics special protections that go well beyond what is reasonable. It seems that the Olympics has come to expect this sort of fealty from everyone, without exception. Earlier this year, we noted that the Olympics were threatening ICANN about its new top level domains, because ICANN wouldn't bend over and block anything that the International Olympics Committee deemed owned by itself. It protested ICANN's new TLD proposals by saying that any benefits were "outweighed by the risks, harms and costs it poses" to the Olympics. Uh yeah.

ICANN's response was to more or less tell the IOC to go pound sand. So, it appears that the Olympics are back and threatening a lawsuit again. I say, let them. I doubt the IOC wants to actually test it's bizarre and blatantly expansionist interpretation of intellectual property laws in any court. The various lawyers who represent the IOC must know that it will lose and lose badly. That's why it's been threatening for months with no actual lawsuits being filed. You can even see this in the latest threat, where the IOC complains that it filed 11 comments on ICANN's policies and every one has been ignored. It seems that ICANN might want to continue this policy and see if it can call the IOC's bluff here.

Filed Under: domain names, icann, olympics, trademark

Olympics Threaten ICANN, Saying Its Trademark Concerns Outweigh Any Benefits From New TLDs

from the sense-of-entitlement-much? dept

It's no secret that the Olympics seem to have a massive sense of entitlement when it comes to trademark issues -- getting various governments to pass laws that go way beyond trademark laws in those countries to add special protections for the Olympics, barring pretty much any unauthorized mentions outside of press coverage (and even that's a bit iffy). This is not at all what trademark law is supposed to do. Its latest move is to complain to ICANN about its new plans for a .sports top level domain, worrying that any benefits "are outweighed by the risks, harms and costs it poses to trademark owners and the public." The public? Really? Furthermore, the IOC warns ICANN that it retains the "right to proceed against ICANN for damages resulting to the IOC or the Olympic Movement from the implementation of an unlimited number of new gTLDs." Nice of them.

That article highlights that the IOC already has special deals with a number of big domain registrars blocking any registration that includes an IOC trademark -- which is highly questionable, since registrations including trademarks are very much allowed to non-trademark holders, so long as the sites aren't confusing to the public (for example, with "sucks sites" which are allowed). Hopefully ICANN stands up to bullying from the IOC which has no real case here, unless gov'ts keep passing special "for the Olympics only" abusive trademark laws.

Filed Under: icann, olympics, tlds, trademark
Companies: icann, ioc

Should ICANN Dump The Idea Of Generic Top Level Domains?

from the yes-or-no dept

For years, we've scolded ICANN for its bizarre policies when it came to new top level domains (TLD) (the things like .com, .net, .org, .biz, .info etc.). For the most part, the whole process seemed like a big money grab, where each new TLD was being introduced not because of any need, but because it would generate extra cash. Take, for example, the creation of the .jobs domain. It's designed to be the place where people can go to find job openings for a company. As if it wasn't easy enough to either go to the site directly and look for the "jobs" link, or to do a quick Google search (though, we must admit to an adolescent snicker, when someone recently pointed out that RIM had amazingly signed up for the unfortunately named rim.jobs).

On the whole, though, there seemed to be no legitimate reason for dribbling out TLDs in this manner. If the world needed more TLDs, why not open the process up entirely, and let people use whatever TLD made the most sense. Last year, it looked like it was making a step in that direction, by announcing plans to offer such generic TLDs, but at the astronomical price of somewhere between $100,000 and $500,000. So, once again, it was all about the money grab, rather than anything useful.

However, with overwhelming opposition to the idea of super high priced generic TLDs, ICANN has delayed the entire project and some are wondering if ICANN should drop the idea entirely. Personally, it still seems like the real plan should be not to do away with generic TLDs entirely, but to just open up the system, so that any TLD can be used, but that you can register for one at the regular domain price, rather than one that's many orders of magnitude higher.

Filed Under: generic, icann, top level domains

After Finding No Joy Elsewhere, SCO Chairman Takes Anti-Porn Fight To ICANN

from the silent-majority dept

A few years ago, Ralph Yarro, the chairman of everybody's favorite tech company, SCO, put forward a plan to ban all internet porn from port 80, the port used by HTTP traffic. He later added that open WiFi should be banned as a means to stop porn. Not surprisingly, his ideas failed to find traction (except with the governor of his home state, Utah) but Yarro and his anti-porn group are pressing on, and are now asking ICANN to set up a "Cybersafety Constituency" to create binding rules on how to deal with net porn. How's this for a binding rule: don't access porn sites, and you won't be bothered with it? The idea that anybody -- let alone ICANN -- should be able to play the role of global web censor is scary, and opens the door to restrictions on all sorts of objectionable, but not illegal, content. As The Register notes, Yarro called for supporters to make comments on the proposal at ICANN's site, and plenty of people from Utah obliged. Wonder what all the people in the state who love net porn think of the proposal...

Filed Under: domains, icann, porn, port 80, ralph yarro
Companies: sco

You Don't Need Us To .tel You This Isn't A Good Idea

from the fun-with-TLDs dept

We'd previously discussed the .tel domain, at least in terms of its sheer ridiculousness. The premise of this latest TLD is that people and companies can use it to put their contact information online. Yes, you read that correctly -- they expect people to pay up for new domains to put their phone number and email address and other contact info online. The promised twist is that a .tel domain "encodes this information into the DNS system." Instead of getting a standard web site when people visit a .tel site, they'll get one that shows contact info. Really groundbreaking stuff, isn't it? The .tel folks also say that certain directory services will be able to access this info.

The mainstream press is doing its typical job of buying into the TLD registrar's claims, without stopping to ask a couple of questions. First, why is something like this at all necessary? Second, is it really a good thing to inject people's contact information into the DNS system? DNS records have long been a favorite haunt for spammers to hunt down email addresses. Now, encouraging people to put their email addresses, IM contacts, phone numbers and physical addresses online, where they can be easily harvested, really doesn't seem like a great idea. Telnic, the company behind .tel, says it's got ways for individuals to control who can see their information (they have a video about the controls), but the system is overly complex and convoluted. In a nutshell, if you want to protect your info, your friends and contacts have to send you "friend requests", which you then need to approve if you want them to see your information. Sound familiar? That's because it's the same thing you've done in all the free social-networking and contact-management sites you've already joined, and where your contact info already lives. Furthermore, if somebody is your friend, isn't it more than likely they already have your contact info? Keeping all the contact info .tel aggregates openly available really doesn't seem like a good idea for individuals; enacting the privacy controls reinforces the utter pointlessness of .tel over already available, free, services. But who cares when the registrar is collecting all those wonderful fees?

Filed Under: .tel, icann, tlds, top level domains

Get Ready To Pay Up Just To Let People Know How To Contact Your Company

from the a-total-waste dept

We've been plenty critical of plans to set up new top level domains for URLs. Each time there's an extension (such as adding .biz, .info, etc.), all it's really meant is that companies felt forced to cough up more money to secure domains they didn't need and wouldn't use. The whole thing is a scam. However, none is as ridiculous as the decision three years ago to add a ".tel" domain, where companies could put their contact info. Yes, apparently, some company convinced ICANN to extend the TLD space for .tel domains -- knowing that tons of companies would have to pay up, just to make sure there their contact info was at company.tel, rather than something like company.com/contact/.

While we hadn't heard much about .tel over the past few years, it looks like it's now set to get moving, as early registrations have opened up, and the one company (the registrar who is going to make all the cash for this) is encouraging companies to pay up. Companies will do so, of course, because they'll feel they need to protect their brand from others -- but they won't do so because it's useful. It's not as if anyone is having any trouble finding the "contact" forms on websites that have them. And, for companies that don't have easy to find contact forms, that's usually by choice -- so it's unlikely they'll suddenly rush to put up a .tel site. This whole process makes no sense, and ICANN, who orchestrated the whole thing, should be ashamed. Basically all it's done is create a totally unnecessary situation, where for no good reasons, a ton of companies have to hand over a bunch of money to Telnic.

Filed Under: .tel, icann, tlds, top level domains
Companies: icann, telnic

ICANN Finally Relaxes TLD Requirements -- But It Still Looks Like A Money Grab

from the cluster.f**k dept

For years, we've been among those who wondered what good it did for ICANN to dribble out new top level domains (TLDs -- such as .info, .biz, .aero, etc.) every few years. For the most part, these new domains didn't do much other than force companies to buy their name on each new TLD as it was released. It basically just seemed like a way for ICANN and registrars to keep fleecing companies. Instead, we agreed with those who wondered why we had a limited number of TLDs in the first place. Why not just open it up and let any address work?

Well, now ICANN has taken a step in that direction... but, not really. It has agreed to open up the TLD system to those beyond what was approved, but anyone registering a name on a non-standard TLD will need to show a "business plan and technical capacity." Why do they need a business plan? What if they just want to set up a site for fun? Oh, right, because if you have a business plan, it means you have money to pay for stuff -- say $100,000 to $500,000?

In other words, rather than really opening up the system, it looks like yet another money grab.

In better news, however, it appears that ICANN has also decided to put in place a tiny charge for registering domain names and dropping them in the "grace period." This hopefully should greatly reduce the practice of domain hoarding (or "domain kiting" or "domain tasting" depending on who you talk to). As you may know. companies have been pulling all sorts of tricks using this grace period to register domains without ever having to pay for them. And, as a result, even companies like Network Solutions have gotten into the game, while pretending that they were holding any domain you searched for in order to "protect" you from others who might squat on the name.

Filed Under: domain kiting, domain tasting, icann, tlds, top level domains
Companies: icann