Another potential threat to our industry surfaces.

http://cadna.org/press-release-july-24.html

You can see ICA's response at InternetCommerce.org.

Thank you.

I think the actual acts of tasting and kiting have proven themselves to be the biggest threat to "our industry" - everything else seems to be in retaliation to those industrial scale infringement mechanisms.

I don't like their sensationalizing the issue, but I do agree that domain tasting *SHOULD* be stopped. The purpose of this registry feature is to allow registrants to delete thei typos in case they make a mistake when entering a domain name.

Get rid of tasting and it would reduce the typo regs since they would be far to costly to scan for. Not to mention right now you can play musical registrars and gain the registration beneift without ever paying for the domain.

I know I'll not be popular for saying this but I think there's common ground on the issue of tasting.

(I just now read the IC's response)

Originally posted by safesys
everything else seems to be in retaliation to those industrial scale infringement mechanisms.

Agreed!

ICA does not support tasting. We are happy to see a change in that policy. I am concerned that we may not always like CADNA proposals. We need to watch what they push in Washington and ICANN.

It's obvious that distinguishing trademarked domain names from generics is hugely important.

Originally posted by MichaelC
I am concerned that we may not always like CADNA proposals. We need to watch what they push in Washington and ICANN.

To be clear I don't like *THIS ONE* given one of it's primary goals is to categorically demonize us.

Originally posted by MichaelC
ICA does not support tasting. We are happy to see a change in that policy.

Those that do support tasting hurt us all. I'd personally prefer to see ICA flat out agree tasting is bad/wrong and harms us all = A bit more proactive stance.

Of course I'm the proverbial bull in a china shop.

To be clear about our concern. Sarah Deutsch, a spokesperson for one of the charter members of CADNA had this to say about the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. "...that the ACPA was no longer having its intended deterrent effect and the aim should be to revisit and amend it to add criminal penalties, authorize the FTC to initiate lawsuits, and provide for increased statutory damages."

Those that do support tasting hurt us all. I'd personally prefer to see ICA flat out agree tasting is bad/wrong and harms us all = A bit more proactive stance.

I think that we have. However, to make sure; the add/delete grace period has been abused by some tasters to infringe upon trademarks. This action has harmed the industry and currently it is practically impossible for trademark owners to stop it. We support changes at ICANN to stop the practice. However, we do not want to see congress get involved. No new laws are required to stop this abusive practice.

"...that the ACPA was no longer having its intended deterrent effect and the aim should be to revisit and amend it to add criminal penalties, authorize the FTC to initiate lawsuits, and provide for increased statutory damages."

Sounds like what they're really saying is that they want other people to shoulder the burden of policing trademark holders rights. The existing acpa isn't very effective when it's not actually being used to any great degree so to say it needs changing rather than using is a bit rich.

We all agree that it is almost impossible for tm owners to take action during the add/delete grace period. That is a problem that needs to be fixed. However, I am concerned that they see this problem as an opportunity to push for unneeded legislation that gives them a bigger bully stick to beat on domainers with. If you have a domain that they want, (legitimately disputed) they want to be able to threaten you with jail time and lawsuits from FTC.

Originally posted by MichaelC
We all agree that it is almost impossible for tm owners to take action during the add/delete grace period. That is a problem that needs to be fixed. However, I am concerned that they see this problem as an opportunity to push for unneeded legislation that gives them a bigger bully stick to beat on domainers with. If you have a domain that they want, (legitimately disputed) they want to be able to threaten you with jail time and lawsuits from FTC.

Agreed.

They are using the 5 day grace to argue unrelated issues, and of course try to demonize us all. Which is why it seems to me getting together on that point would be good.

Of course I'm not sure that Versign will be happy with anybody eliminating the very large float they enjoy against all that tasting activity as well as the resulting regs. Which just brings us back to registry and ICANN conflict of interest issues ....

PIR has really been an amazing standout regarding these issues.

would help our response?

http://www.domainstate.com/showthrea...threadid=77491

Maybe, ICA should push for criminal action if a firm attempts to
take/steal a domain using "reverse hi-jacking" and they lose.

Originally posted by DomeBase
would help our response?

http://www.domainstate.com/showthrea...threadid=77491

agreed, I am waiting too!

Originally posted by MichaelC
agreed, I am waiting too!

Waiting for what?