Mike Berkens had an important blog post at:

http://www.thedomains.com/2009/01/06...-cancellation/

Most folks ignored this when .info implemented such a policy (I was outspoken against it). Hopefully folks will be more vocal this time, as it's a slippery slope when registry operators get such powers to use at their discretion, especially when there are potential financial incentives. See past discussion of the .info version at:

http://www.domainstate.com/showthrea...threadid=91572

Looks to be cookie cutter of the .INFO policy.

Not a big surprise given they share the same backend provider (Afilias), so I'd expected all other TLDs on Afilias will be passing the same policy at this point.

Right, it's the exact same oddball definition of "abuse" that I criticized before, that no one else in the world uses as a definition for "abuse." Do a Google search for "wrong or excessive use of power, position or ability"

http://www.google.com/search?num=30&...22&btnG=Search

and no one else, amongst every ISP or service provider or website that has a TOS or abuse policy uses such a definition.

Excessive use of "position"? Is that like a CEO of a large bank making millions of dollars, excessive in the eyes of socialist, while the janitor makes only $30K/yr, due to the CEO's "position"? Excessive use of "ability"? Warren Buffett should be punished for making tens of billions of dollars, due to his ability, as someone "in their sole discretion" thinks that's too much?

Compare Afilias' oddball language to the precise language in the UDRP, as a counterpoint.

And the other dangerous language is "without limitation" --- that means they can toss in who knows what in the future.

PIR's Alexa Raad has responded in the comments to the article I submitted at CircleID:

http://www.circleid.com/posts/200901..._domain_names/

and PIR has also finally posted on their blog:

http://blog.pir.org/?p=108

Note that all comments on the PIR blog are moderated, so it might take a while (if ever) for them to be displayed.