According to marketingvox.com, The Association of National Advertisers (ANA) urged the US Department of Commerce (DOC) to work within the Internet stakeholder processes of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to advocate for a “Do Not Sell registry” at the upcoming ICANN Board meeting next month in Toronto.
The letter went on to note that “it would be a disaster for its competitors if L’Oreal snapped up generic domains like .hair, .makeup, and .beauty; but that is what’s at stake for advertisers. Also at stake claims the, a flood of secondary domains that would choke the internet, and exponential growth in cybersquatting and fraud.”
Said Dan Jaffe, ANA Group Executive Vice President in the letter, “The Internet community is on the verge of a [TLD] tsunami which will create a huge wave of risk for both businesses and consumers.” More than a thousand TLDs are being considered to be added to the internet which should lead to an “explosive growth in secondary domains (those domains to the left of the dot in Internet addresses). We believe it is critical that the DOC push for a comprehensive protection system that includes both a Do Not Sell registry and strong Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs).”
ANA’s letter claims a growing consensus within the business community to implement a TLD block list to avoid the need for defensive registrations.
“As an example, if someone snaps up the gTLD “.sucks,” then a brand like McDonalds would have to buy the mcdonalds.sucks secondary domain to defend itself. Or an auto dealer called “Bennigan Cars” would have to snap up bennigan.car, else risk having to pay an exorbitant fee to some cybersquatter.”
“ANA believes a TLD-by-TLD block list will be wholly inadequate for the number of new gTLDs expected to be approved by ICANN.”
“The cost to companies that want to defensively register domains at the second level could mount easily into the multi-millions of dollars. The costs of defensive registrations also could be economically unfeasible for small and medium sized companies that will face enhanced risks of cybersquatting, typosquatting and phishing in the expanding top level domain universe.”
ANA has advocated for ICANN to adopt a “Do Not Sell” registry for almost a year and will be taking part in the upcoming ICANN Board meeting next month in Toronto to continue to push for the approach. ANA’s letter concluded: “We are on the verge of grave threats to the stability of the Internet, so now is the time to act.”
This is the tsunami that has raised discussions on gtld’s on every top domain board in the country. We know .com is going to survive.. but I really don’t think that anyone including myself really understands the impact that gtld’s are going to have on the internet.
The people in washington and elsewhere all miss the fact that the new TLDs do the exact same thing as the old ones, no more likely to have fraud or abuse or porn or spam, any TLD is just as likely, other than .gov which is exclusive. There are unlimited variations already for mcdonalds and loreal to “defend” as if that was necessary at all. lorealareabunchoffrekinbozos.com butnotasbadasANA.ninja
“We are on the verge of grave threats to the stability of the Internet, so now is the time to act.”, actually we are on the verge of absolute fools influencing the future of technology, marketing and investing, Dan Jaffe is a joke and needs a real job.
This Monster Just Keeps Getting Bigger !!! I’ll Stick To Number One Dot Com
If “the new TLDs do the exact same thing as the old ones,” why do we need duplication? Let alone enhanced exposure to potential harm?
For those readers with initiative, here is a form letter that you may wish to send to the US DoC & ICANN.
It’s a … PREEMPTIVE STRIKE & PETETION LETTER, TO ICANN, FOR US DoC ATTENTION:
U.S. Department of Commerce.
Office of Business Liaison
Matthew T. McGuire
1401 Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, D.C.
20230.
USA.
ICANN.
Legal Department.
1101 New York Ave, NW
Suite 930
Washington, DC
20005.
USA.
Notice of impending suit against: ICANN – Contributory Infringement.
Dear Mr. McGuire: cc ICANN ~ Legal Department.
This letter is both a preemptive strike against ICANN; and a petition, to the US DoC, requesting that the ICANN contract be immediately suspended; and that the US DoC secure a more competent ~ American ~ agency to manage the Internet. (form letter created in Canada, so no bias.)
I’m writting to voice my concern over the “new TLD’s” being issued by ICANN, which MAY impact my business, adversely <<>> currently “Registered” and in commerce, bone fide, from & under the United States DoC “agents” authority, as a .com ~ .net ~ .org <<>>
My “Mark” under US Law, maybe “incontestable” if older than five (5) years, with some paperwork! My “Mark” dated at <<>> qualifies as “Incontestable” under US Law, under 15 U.S.C. § 1065, and short of doing the paperwork, establishes my defensive rights to claims of infringement, should / when such need arise.
For the benefit of clarification, when / if required, here is a widely accepted definition: Contributory Infringement.
One who knowingly induces, causes or materially contributes to “Mark” (.com ~ .net ~ .org) infringement Common Law, States Right, or Trademark, by another >>> but who has not committed or participated in the infringing acts him or herself, may be held liable as a contributory infringer if he or she had knowledge, or reason to know, of the infringement. <<>> ICANN “manufactures” infringing opportunities, by / with these new TLD’s. <<>> or if it continues to supply its product to one whom it knows or has reason to know is engaging in trademark infringement, the “manufacturer” or distributer is contributorially responsible for any harm done as a result of the deceit. <<<
For the public record; I as a "Mark" holder of <<>> have published this letter into my businesses website, in order to stamp & validate communications between parties, as a Pro Se, in the absence of a contracted lawyer.
On behalf of my firm <<>> I thank the US DoC in advance for their action in / by the termination of ICANN and the halting of this rapidly advancing problem.
Sincerely.
<<>>