Domain Name Developments

COM LAUDE
Briefing Notes for Com Laude
Clients & Contacts

Summer Issue: August 2008

announced that the process to expand the number of gTLDs
In this issue: had the green light: “The ICANN Board today accepted a
■ Briefing on new gTLDs: what we know, what we recommendation from its global stakeholders that it is
think, winners & losers possible to implement many new names to the Internet,
paving the way for an expansion of domain name choice and
■ ICANN policies: an end to Add Grace, GNSO reform
and RAA review opportunity.The potential here is huge. It represents a whole
new way for people to express themselves on the Net. It's a
■ Formality changes at 13 ccTLDs
massive increase in the 'real estate' of the Internet."
■ DRS updates from CAC, Nominet & Afnic
There’s not much chance of the bandwagon halting. ICANN
has published an anticipated timeline and directed staff to
complete work on an implementation plan which will be
Part One: gTLD News presented to the Board for approval at the 33rd ICANN Open
Meeting to be held in Cairo in November 2008.
New gTLDs: where are we now?
Today there are 21 gTLDs. In two years time, there may well
be 121 or 221. In a decade it is possible that there could be as
many gTLDs as there are categories in the Yellow Pages, a
melange of generic terms, city and place names, titles of
indigenous peoples, cultural and social indicators and trade
marks. Indeed, it could be that gTLDs will outnumber ccTLDs,
a sobering thought for the IP community.

What do we know for certain about

the new gTLD process?
Generic Top Level Domains are managed by ICANN, the
Internet Corporation of Assigned Names and Numbers, a
not-for profit corporation based in California which currently
creates policies through a bottom-up process, under the
oversight of the US Department of Commerce. Provided you
meet the rules of the registry, anyone anywhere can register
a gTLD. GTLD registries are currently split between Sponsored
gTLDs (registries for a well-defined community such as
members of the International Co-operative Society who are
eligible for a .coop) and Unsponsored gTLDs such as .info
which was designed as a simple alternative to .com.
On the last day of the 32nd ICANN Open Meeting on 26 June
2008, Dr Paul Twomey, President and CEO of ICANN,
The ICANN Team running the new gTLD process is led by Kurt
Pritz, Senior VP of Services and Karla Valente, gTLD Program
Director. They have appointed a number of consultants to
work with them on the development of an objective
application and evaluation process including Deloitte Audit &
Enterprise Risk Services from Belgium which has been drafting
the Request for Proposals (RFP) (which is what ICANN calls the
application form).
Together they have designed a staged application process as
follows:
■ A draft of the Application Form and the base contract
will be published;
■ Following comment from the internet community, the
Application and Base contract will be finalised;

www.comlaude.com COM LAUDE 1/10

■ Towards the end of a four month “period for auction. As the new gTLD Policy Process favoured
communication”, the final application period will open Community applications, a Community application that
for 45 days; can demonstrate it will “clearly and convincingly add
■ Applications must be accompanied by a fee at a level to more value to the global internet namespace” will win
be announced; over an Open application during Comparative
■ All complete applications will be posted on ICANN’s Evaluation.
website after the Application Period closes; ■ Applications that are approved will be recommended to
the Board for approval. Delegation of a character string
■ Applications will be divided into two categories:
into the root of the internet will depend on the
Open applications “from any type of applicant”
applicant demonstrating it has fulfilled all of the
including a trade mark owner applying for .BRAND
baseline criteria in the contract. ICANN will agree a time
Community applications which “address a clearly period with each separate applicant.
identified, organised and pre-established
community with a finite membership”.
The character string that is applied for must be
“strongly and specifically associated with the
community” and there must be a “dedicated
registration and use policy”
■ The Initial Evaluation phase will feature:
an examination of the character strings applied for.
ICANN has commissioned an algorithm to expose
clashes with existing TLDs (gTLDs and ccTLDs) and
reserved names

a Technical Evaluation: “Applicants must

demonstrate competence to run a registry in
What don’t we know about the
compliance with industry protocols and standards”
process?
a Business Evaluation: “Applicants must
demonstrate the capability of running a stable ■ The exact timing: it appears that applications will open
registry”; in Q2 2009 but the history of gTLD expansion is littered
with broken deadlines.
■ If an Applicant fails the Initial Evaluation, it can apply for
■ The amount of the application fee: there has been
Extended Evaluation which may require the payment of
speculation that it could be as low as $100,000 to be
an additional fee;
accessible to community groups or as high as $500,000
■ An Objection process will then be opened during which
to deter speculative bids. Will any proportion of the
applications can be opposed on four grounds:
application fee be returned by ICANN if an application
1. String confusion (to avoid user confusion)
fails?
2. Existing legal rights (so IPR are protected)
■ The cost and process of mounting an objection: this is a
3. Morality and Public Order (to spare the blushes
vital piece of information for trade mark owners who
of governments)
may find that someone wants to turn their mark into
4. Community Objection (expected from religious
a gTLD.
organisations, indigenous groups, geographical
■ The model of auction, the auction provider and how
communities)
funds generated during an auction are to be used has
■ Objections will be managed by one of four independent
yet to be determined.
DRS providers.The same DRS provider will handle all
■ Who will apply: Several organisations have announced
objections under one of the above categories.The rules,
their intention of applying for gTLDs such as .berlin;
procedures, principles and fees will be created by each
.paris; .nyc; .arab; .fam (for families); .africa etc but who
DRS provider in conjunction with ICANN. If there is more
else is waiting in the wings?
than one objection to an application, it may be
■ How many applications there will be and how many will
consolidated with other complaints;
be approved: delegates at the ICANN Paris Meeting were
■ “String Contention” between two applicants who want
talking about 100 or 200 applications but if the
the same gTLD will be resolved through mutual
application fee is affordable, there could be 500 or even
discussion, a Comparative Evaluation process or an

www.comlaude.com COM LAUDE 2/10

 1,000 applications. Previous gTLD rounds featured a
competitive tendering process with the Board selecting
winners following a series of discussions some of which
were in private.This time it is running an open, objective
process designed to encourage good applications.
■ When the application process will next open after the
2008/9 round: ICANN has implied that this is not a
one-time process. Depending on the number of
applications it receives, it might be that ICANN will open
an application window every year for the foreseeable
future or it might be that this is the only chance for
five years.
What worries us?
The protection of IPR during the new gTLD process is a
subject that ICANN has neatly avoided. At the Paris Meeting,
the Intellectual Property Constituency attempted to fill this
gap when it launched a booklet, edited by Nick Wood of Com
Laude and sponsored by MARQUES, called“A Perfect Sunrise?”
which examines the pre-launch Rights Protection
Mechanisms (RPM) that have been tried by both gTLD and
ccTLD operators. The launch was attended by over 150
delegates, several of whom enquired why ICANN is not
mandating a standardised pre-launch RPM for all applicants in
the same way as the UDRP is a standardised post-launch RPM.
In fact ICANN attempted this through a formal Working Group
process in 2007 but there was no consensus following
objections by registry operators and registrars who were
concerned to protect the interests of Domainer clients.
Therefore it is up to each applicant to design and operate a
pre-launch RPM that best suits its model of registry.
(For a free copy of “The Perfect Sunrise?” mail us at
info@comlaude.com or see the link from our website).
Charter enforcement is vital: if a new gTLD such as .berlin is
designed for the people of Berlin, it seems logical to us that
only those who can demonstrate a nexus with Berlin should
be allowed to register. However, conversations with several
aspiring applicants – including .berlin – have revealed that
many intend to allow anyone to register anything without
scrutiny. We hope that the validation of IPR that successive
gTLD and ccTLD registries have adopted since the launch of
.eu in 2005 will be continued, but this is not certain.
IP owners will face a significant set of new challenges. It will
take a major increase in resources to monitor the rules of 100
- 200 new registries and a substantial increase in budget to
fund a protective registration programme.Time must also be
found to monitor all applicants for“string contention”– and of
course there is the question of whether it would be
www.comlaude.com
commercially advantageous to apply for a gTLD that matches
the name of a trade mark. Whilst there is a compelling case
for some organisations born of the internet age, many others
can easily resist this opportunity.The question of whether to
apply for a generic term that relates to a class of goods or
services – such as BMW applying for .AUTO or British Airways
applying for .AIRLINE is another matter. Perhaps we will see
the dominant players in a business area coming together
under a flag of convenience to apply for a term that reflects
their mutual interests.
Who will be the winners?
ICANN: ICANN is securing its long term financial future with
the new gTLD programme. It currently receives $0.20 per for
each gTLD registration. 100 or 200 new gTLDs mean more
funds from the application process and more funds every year
from these sources. The new gTLD programme will support
an expansion of ICANN’s activities, new staff and offices in
several parts of the world as well as raising its profile with
governments.
Supporters of the democratisation of the domain name
system beyond the English language: “One of the most
exciting prospects before us is that the expanding gTLD
system is being planned to support extensions in the
languages of the world," said Peter Dengate Thrush, ICANN's
Chairman at the Paris Meeting, anticipating that some new
gTLDs will offer full IDN registration from go-live."This is going
to be very important for the future of the Internet in Asia, the
Middle East, Eastern Europe and Russia." Currently the DNS
only supports 37 Roman characters (A-z, 0 -9 and the hyphen).
The technical companies who can operate back-end registry
systems: in a gold rush, it is those who sell the picks and
shovels who make a fortune. ICANN is prioritising stability so
it may be essential to feature a proven TLD registry operator
in an application.
Some new gTLD applicants who will find that that their
vision captures the imagination of the public and fulfills a
so-far unspoken need.
Some registrants who are currently labouring under a
domain name that is far from ideal because their first choice
was already taken under .com. If a new extension for their
sphere of business is created, it might be that they will be able
to raise their profile on the internet after spending just a few
dollars on a new domain name that fits perfectly.
COM LAUDE 3/10
The search engine operators because if gTLDs proliferate,
no-one will try to guess at a domain name by using so-called
“Direct Navigation” (typing what you think is the right
company name and domain extension straight into a
browser). The chances of finding what you want will be just
too remote. Instead it will be far simpler to go to Google,
Yahoo!, MSN or other search engine providers.
The owners of good .com names: in ten years time, the value
of a strong .com could rise as it is taken as an indicator of a
well-established business, an early adopter of the internet, an
organisation that stands secure above the noise of the new
gTLD process.
Domainers who will have that many more extensions to
speculate with.
ICANN Accredited Registrars as only they can sell gTLDs.
Who will be the losers?
The IP community: a proliferation of registries means more
infringement or more cost for defensive registrations (as
discussed above);
The ccTLDs, possibly: just as they were gaining ground on
the gTLDs, along comes this initiative. Will it be more
important for you to register and maintain your brand around
the world or under the gTLDs?
Some existing gTLDs: it has been suggested that some of
the current gTLDs, especially those that were designed to be
alternatives to .com or those that have failed to capture the
public imagination such as .NAME may lose market share.
Some new gTLD applicants who are accepted: winning
through the ICANN process does not guarantee success.
Whilst some Sponsored gTLDs such as .CAT count success by
more than just the number of registrations (for example by
the number of pages on the internet in Catalan under .CAT
registrations), many speculators will want their registries to
be immediately successful, returning investors a tidy profit.
This cannot be guaranteed. After all, there was no public
outcry for new gTLDs. It was only the ICANN community,
dominated by registry operators (who hope to market their
technical systems) and registrars (who hope to sell more and
more registrations) who called for the expansion of the
gTLD space.
What happens next?
By the time the 33nd ICANN Open Meeting starts in Cairo on
www.comlaude.com
2 November 2008, the draft Application form and Base
Contract should have been published, the DRS providers
appointed and a global communications campaign to
encourage applicants and raise awareness will be underway.
We should also know the exact date in 2009 when the 45 day
Application Period will open and the costs of applying.
We probably aren’t going to apply for .COMLAUDE in the first
round but with our experience of working on two successful
gTLD bids in earlier rounds, we are looking for a small number
of IP owners who we can work with on a strategic approach
to the new gTLD process. This might mean creating a new
strategy for protecting IP in the domain name system,
monitoring applications in order to mount an objection or
even developing a bid. We have put in place back-end
technical operators, a project management team that
understands ICANN plus financial experts. After all, whatever
measures ICANN puts in place, it is hard to see this as anything
than another internet land grab. Love it or loathe it, you
cannot ignore it.
A welcome end to the Add Grace
period
The ICANN Board has finally voted to end domain name
tasting by registrars who exploit the Add Grace Period. At the
Paris Open Meeting on 26 June 2008 the Board approved a
proposal to levy the $0.20 cent ICANN fee on every domain
registered, whether or not it is deleted within the five day Add
Grace Period, starting from 1 July 2008.
The Add Grace Period (AGP) was introduced as a safety net
for registrars, giving them a five day grace period following
registration, during which they could delete domains
registered in error (e.g. with a spelling mistake) or by third
parties using fraudulent credit cards.The system was abused
by domainers who would register thousands of domain
names every day,“taste”them to see if they attracted sufficient
traffic during the five day window to justify the annual
registration fee and delete those that did not. Those that did
attract sufficient traffic often ended up with Pay Per Click sites.
The wording of the Board resolution runs:“During any given
month, an Applicable gTLD Operator may not offer any refund
to a registrar for any domain names deleted during the AGP
that exceed (i) 10% of that registrar’s net new registrations in
that month (defined as total new registrations less domains
deleted during AGP), or (ii) fifty (50) domain names, whichever
is greater.”
COM LAUDE 4/10
It is still possible that tasting will occur but the costs are going
to be much higher. Let us consider the maths: in a five day
period, a domainer registrar might register 100,000 .com
domains and only keep 500 - deleting 99,500. When the Add
Grace Period was there to be exploited, the domainer registrar
would only have been charged the ICANN fee at point of
registration ($0.20) and the registry levy ($6.42 per annum).
This means they would have been charged $100 (500 x 0.20)
plus $3,210 ($6.42 x 500) making a grand total of $3,310.
Under the new policy, a domainer registry tasting 100,000
domains would be charged $20,000 (100,000 x 0.20) in ICANN
fees and the registrar levy of $3210 (500 x $6.42 ) on the
retained domains making $23,210 in total.
ICANN proposes changes to Registrar
Accreditation Agreement
The Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) governs the
relationship between ICANN and the 900+ registrars who are
accredited to sell gTLDs. ICANN is now proposing changes to
the RAA in four main areas:
■ Enforcement: amendments designed to enhance
registrar compliance and ICANN's enforcement of
the RAA;
■ Registrant Protection: amendments aimed at protecting
the data and overall interests of registrants;
■ Promoting stability: amendments aimed at ensuring
that all registrars operate to mandated, minimum
standards;
■ Modernisation of the agreement: amendments to
update the provisions in light of industry developments,
ICANN policy and the law.
Practices which are under scrutiny include the warehousing of
domains by registrars, the cross-ownership of registrars by
registry operators, the practice of associated groups of
companies acquiring several accreditations, for example to
further their goals as Domainers, and the security of
registrant data. For further information, go to
www.icann.org/en/topics/raa/.
GNSO: Remaking the balance of
power in ICANN
The Generic Names Supporting Organisation (GNSO) is the
key part of ICANN where the private sector contributes to the
creation of policy. It is made up of six constituencies, namely
the gTLD Registry Operators, Accredited Registrars, the Non-
Commercial Interests, the Intellectual Property Constituency,
www.comlaude.com
the Business Constituency and the ISP & Connectivity
Providers.The last three constituencies are where you will find
representatives from the private sector and commerce who
do not have a contractual relationship with ICANN.The GNSO
forms Working Groups to address issues from IDNs to Domain
Tasting, recommending improvements to the Board through
a Policy Development Process (PDP).
Since the end of 2007, a process has been under way to
“improve the GNSO”. At the ICANN Meeting in Paris a
magnificent lobbying effort co-ordinated jointly by the
Business, ISP and Intellectual Property Constituencies
persuaded the ICANN Board to delay approval of a
controversial plan by the so-called “Board Governance
Working Group on GNSO Improvements” that would have
seen the votes and influence of the private sector reduced.
Instead the Board directed the GNSO to convene a small
working group featuring one representative from each
constituency plus other key parties including the Nominating
Committee of the Board to come up with a “consensus
recommendation on GNSO restructuring”by no later than 25
July 2008. This working group strived to find a compromise
solution acceptable to all, with Steve Metalitz, President of the
IPC, representing the interests of trade mark owners.
Here’s an extract from the summary that the Working Group
finally sent to the ICANN Board on 25 July 2008: “In the end,
the group has reached consensus…on a number of general
concepts and principles regarding the future structure,
composition and operation of the GNSO Council. Where
possible, the group also made the effort and achieved
agreement on a number of specific voting mechanisms and
voting thresholds ranging from Board representatives to
specific Policy Development Process (PDP) decision points -
including such matters as the initiation and approval of a PDP,
among others.
There were also a number of areas where the group did not
reach consensus because there was not sufficient time to
complete the work, or because there were fundamental
differences in views that could not be overcome. In particular,
there was a specific disagreement over the existence of a third
Nominating Committee appointee slot on the Council that
prevented consensus on specific aspects of the new Council
structure and its composition and ultimately resulted in the
Nominating Committee Appointee representative
withdrawing support from the general consensus”.
Where to next? Will the ICANN Board seek to build on the
consensus that has been found or impose a solution? At the
ICANN Paris Meeting, a breakfast was held between members
COM LAUDE 5/10
of the Board and representatives of the three private sector
constituencies. Time and time again the point was made to
ICANN that unless it allows the private sector a place at the
table where policy decisions are made on an equal basis with
the contracted parties (the registries and registrars who
derive their income from selling domains), the private sector
will withdraw its support and seek to engage directly with
governments over the running of the domain name system.
We’ll know by the time of the next ICANN Board Meeting in
Cairo in November 2008 if anyone was listening.
.INFO: domain of choice for malware
This is being a long, hot summer for .INFO. First Google
dropped .INFO domain names from its rankings, albeit
temporarily. Then McAfee, the anti-virus software maker,
published its second “Mapping the Mal Web Report” which
identifies the domain extensions which carry the highest
number of so-called “malicious websites”. .INFO was the
highest ranked gTLD with some 11.7% of sites posing a
security threat whilst .HK (19.2%) and .CN (11.8%) were the
most risky ccTLD sites. .AU and .JP were the safest ccTLD
registrations.
.ORG: first to introduce DNSSEC
The Public Interest Registry had its request to implement
Domain Name Security Extensions (DNSSEC) approved by the
ICANN Board at the Paris ICANN Open Meeting in July.
DNSSEC is designed to protect servers from attacks, such as
DNS cache poisoning. It is a set of DNS extensions which
provide origin authentication of DNS data, and data integrity.
This is a timely development. In January 2008, Dan Kaminsky,
a network security analyst who specialises in domain name
issues, discovered a serious vulnerability in the Domain Name
System which would allow hackers to redirect Internet users
to fake sites, even if they had entered the correct domain
name in a browser. Kaminsky informed major net operators
(ISC, Cisco, Google, Yahoo and Microsoft among others) in
secret about this flaw and worked with their engineers to
develop a patch.This patch was released in the second week
of July 2008. We immediately applied it to all of our servers.
.TEL: USP explained; dates and Sunrise
confirmed
In the last Com Laude Newsletter we summarised how the
.TEL Sunrise would work. Now almost five months in advance
www.comlaude.com
(a unique achievement for a gTLD operator), Telnic have
published the full details of its Sunrise, which commences on
3 December 2008, two months in advance of the Landrush,
which opens on 3 February 2009. General Availability begins
on 29 March 2009.
Here is a summary of the key points of the Sunrise, taken
from their excellent website at www.telnic.org/launch-
sunrise.html.
Key Point Description
Timing Sunrise opens at 15:00 GMT on 3
December 2008 and closes 23:59 GMT on
2 February 2009. Applications will only be
accepted from ICANN accredited registrars
Eligibility Owners and licensees of trademarks
registered with national effect may apply.
Trademarks must have been applied for
prior to 30 May 2008 and registered prior
to 3 December 2008. Applications may be
based on both word and figurative (device)
marks that consist exclusively or
predominantly of words
Term Sunrise registrations will carry a three-
year term
Selection The selection method is first-come, first-
method served. The Validation Agent will review
applications for conformity with the
Sunrise Policy
Validation All Sunrise applications will be validated by
Deloitte
Reconsideration If an application is rejected, the applicant
will have 10 days to file an appeal. If an
application is accepted, third parties will
have 10 days to file a challenge
Sunrise Policy Registrations during Sunrise are subject to
the standard registration conditions
contained in Acceptable Use Policy (AUP)
and the Sunrise Policy provided below
If you are still confused about .TEL check out the videos and
demonstrations available at www.telnic.org/business-
landing.html. These demonstrate the USP of .TEL which can
be summed up as a flexible global contact directory. The
marketing blurb says that, “.Tel is a service that allows
individuals and businesses alike to store and manage all their
contact information and keywords directly in the DNS
without the need to build, host or manage a website”.
What we’ve concluded is that a .TEL domain can add real
value to us in our business, enabling us to keep in touch
seamlessly according to priorities we set.There’s been a trend
in recent TLD launches towards defensive registration, with IP
owners securing key terms only, because ownership is simpler
and cheaper than recovery. Certainly, that’s what we have
done. However, we’re making plans to use the .TEL
registrations we are going to apply for as soon as we can. It’s
not just that Telnic are our neighbours and we manage their
domains. It is because .TEL offers a real innovation in internet
communication.
COM LAUDE 6/10
 replace the local DRS and restrictions will be lifted on who can
Part Two become an authorized registrar.

A world of ccTLDs .DE – Two letter registration allowed

.AR – New sub-domain and IDN characters
Argentina has launched a new sub-domain, .TUR.AR for “any
registered company recognised by the National Tourism
Secretary of Argentina”. In other words, the extension is aimed
at airlines, hotels, tour operators and travel agents. Overseas
companies who desire a .TUR.AR registration will have to
demonstrate a local presence. Argentine companies must
provide a company registration number.
This month a process is starting for the introduction of IDN
registrations under .AR featuring both Spanish and
Portuguese characters. For example, if you have
informacion.com.ar you will now be able to register
información.com.ar. The allowable character sets are: "á" ,"â",
"ã", "à", "é", "ê", "í", " ó", "ô", "õ ","ú", "ü" "ñ" y "ç". There is a 100
day priority registration period for the holders of current .AR
registrations who wish to secure the IDN equivalent.
.AU – Liberalisation by degrees
Australia: New regulations governing the transfer or sale of
.au domain names, first announced by AUDA, the Australian
Domain Names Authority last December, came into force last
month. You can now offer your .au domain name for sale to
another entity provided the purchaser complies with the
eligibility rules. Some restrictions remain: you cannot register
a domain for the purpose of selling it or transfer a domain for
six months after registering it except under “special
circumstances” which are not defined in the leaflet AUDA
has published, available at:
www.auda.org.au/pdf/registrant-transfer.pdf.
.BE – IDN introduction postponed
Germany: the Higher Court of Frankfurt has ordered German
registry DENIC to allow auto manufacturer Volkswagen to
register the two letter domain VW.DE. This may open up the
way for further two letter registrations.DENIC had argued that
registrations with two digits might be confused with the
country code suffixes. However, there is no country code VW.
.GW – Redelegation and reactivation
Guinea Bisseau: IANA has redelegated the .GW domain to the
Fundação IT & Media, Universidade de Bissao at the request of
the Guinea Bisseau Government. Karl Kotowski, President of
the Fundação has plans to reactivate this domain before the
end of the year.
.IE – Milestone passed
Ireland: 100,000 domains have been registered in the
Republic of Ireland.The decision to relax the requirement for
every new applicant to supply supporting documentation
showing incorporation of a local company or a nexus with
Ireland has led to a surge in registrations.
.LV – Registry checks CTM database
Latvia:The .lv registry like most others forbids the registration
of a domain that matches a third party’s trade mark. However,
unlike most other domain registries, the Latvians run a check
against the on-line CTM database and raise an objection if
the name requested matches a trade mark belonging to
another party.
.ME – 80,000 registrations but who are the
buyers?

Belgium: those good folk who run the .BE registry have the Montenegro: When the .ME registry officially opened for live,
technology in place to introduce IDN registration. However, real-time registrations on 17 July 2008 more than 50,000 new
before proceeding they undertook a consultation process domain names were registered in the first two days, building
only to find that 2/3rds of registrars were against the idea.The on the 30,000 registrations made under the Sunrise and
implementation has therefore been postponed. Landrush periods. The first "live" name registered was
YUSU.ME (no pun intended).
.CO – New managers and new DRS
The top 10 countries by origin of registrant were:
Colombia: The Ministry of Communications in Colombia has 1. United States 50 % 2. United Kingdom 11%
appointed new managers for .CO and as a result a number of 3. Germany 9% 4. Canada 5%
changes are planned including registration directly under .CO 5. China 3% 6. France 3%
from 2009, registration with accented characters (Ñ) and 7. Netherlands 2% 8. Australia 1.5%
possibly full IDN registration.The UDRP may be introduced to 9. Israel 1% 10. Spain 1%

www.comlaude.com COM LAUDE 7/10

As“me”is not a common word in Germany, France Israel, China
or Spain, what does this tell us about these early adopters?
Were they genuine end users or speculators?
.MX – Control passes to registrants
Mexico: NIC Mexico has introduced a new ownership
schedule so that the Registrant rather than the Administrative
Contact will have control over the ownership of a .MX domain.
Changes and updates must be approved by the Registrant.
NIC MX is also planning to introduce a Registry-Registrar
model rather than requiring all registrants to work through
the registry itself.
.NL – Registration at 3rd Level under co.nl
Netherlands: EuroDNS, a registrar based in Luxembourg, is
marketing registrations under .CO.NL as“a brand new horizon
for Dutch and International enterprises….like .NL but with
additional flexibility”.What this means is that having acquired
the two letter domain name CO.NL, they are marketing
registrations at the third level e.g. YOURBRAND.CO.NL. We
have always been concerned at this practice.There is nothing
illegal about it but unwary registrants might believe they are
entering into an agreement with an official ccTLD registry, not
a private company. What would happen if EuroDNS received
an offer of say £1 million for .CO.NL? Would they sell the
domain and allow all registrations at the third level to drop?
Probably not in this case because EuroDNS has gone to
extraordinary steps to dress up .CO.NL like an official ccTLD
sub-domain. There is going to be a Sunrise Period with
validation by Deloitte Laga and registrants of current .NL
names will be“Grandfathered”, meaning offered registration in
a priority period.Registrars will be accredited and there will be
a Dispute Policy.
What do SIDN, official operators of .NL, think of all this? On
their website they say:
“First, we wish to stress that SIDN, the .nl registry, is not
associated with co.nl. Anyone, anywhere in the world, may
register a domain name at the first level below .nl.
Furthermore, the registrant of such a name is free to use it in
any way that is consistent with SIDN’s General Terms and
Conditions. One of the things that the registrant of a .nl
domain is free to do is to create subdomains within the
registered domain. ...
“Second, it is important to understand that anyone who
registers a co.nl label is NOT registering a .nl domain name.
They are buying a commercial service from a Luxemburg-
based company that has registered the .nl domain name co.nl.
www.comlaude.com
We advise all users to carefully consider what DNS services
they require, the basis on which they wish to secure them and
who they wish to obtain them from. There are numerous
market players, including roughly 250 separate TLD service
providers, which directly issue domain names on a global
basis. SIDN – which assigns .nl names – is one of those
providers. Such TLDs are formally registered and recognised
by ICANN.
“Naturally, one option that a user has is to obtain a subdomain
from an alternative provider.However, we advise registrants to
compare both prices and service conditions before entering
into a contract with a provider.” See:
www.sidn.nl/ace.php/c,728,5881,,,,Information_about_co_nl.
html
Meanwhile SIDN is introducing a quarantine period for lapsed
.NL domain names from 30 August 2008. When a domain is
cancelled by its registrant or by SIDN, it will be placed in
quarantine. For a period of 40 days only the original registrant
will be able to re-register the domain name. A good thing,
we say.
.NU – Numerics allowed
Niue, the Pacific island whose extension means “Now” in a
cluster of Northern European countries, has launched the
extension of three and four letter numeric domains such as
888.NU.This follows the recent example of countries including
the Netherlands and Singapore.
.PL – Home of the domainer
Poland: NASK, the Polish Research & Academic Computer
Network, which administers the .PL extension and registered
the millionth .pl registration in May 2008 announced last
month that its role is “to support an active trade in domains”.
Head of the NASK Internet Domains Division, Andrzej
Bartosiewicz said, “Approaches to the value of internet
domains has changed in recent years. Not so long ago, a
domain was treated quite “technically” as an address
necessary for a correct operation of business servers or
electronic mail. Currently, the domain becomes an interest
having a real market value due to its growing importance
both in traditional and developing internet business. It can
be “bought”, “sold”, “rented” or treated as a profitable
investment instead of putting money in more traditional
forms of investment, such as shares or real estates.”
Therefore NASK has established a range of services designed
to encourage the Aftermarket including a 52 Day Free Credit
period for accredited registrars, formalised Domain Name
Tasting (DNT)“so the customer can check during the period of
COM LAUDE 8/10
14 days profits and possibilities which his/her domain gives,
as well to test the traffic before registration”, a Wait List Option
so you can buy first place in a queue for a name after the
current registrant lapses it, a list of expired names and
unlimited access to Whois information.
Part Three
Domain Dispute News
CAC drives for e-filing of UDRP
complaints
CAC, the Czech Arbitration Court which runs the DRS for .eu
and has been approved as a new UDRP panel provider for
gTLD disputes, has applied to ICANN to test-run two
modifications that it wishes to introduce to the UDRP process
featuring a simplified way of sending signed hardcopy
complaints and the printing and delivery of signed electronic
documents.
CAC is pushing as hard as it can to introduce e-UDRP filing.
Anyone who has laboured to produce hard copy bundles of
complaint after complaint, paying substantial courier costs
will support their efforts. Further details of the trial, which has
yet to be approved by the ICANN Board, can be found at:
http://www.icann.org/udrp/proposals/cac-pilot-projects-
description-18jun08.pdf.
Nominet UK DRS review calls
domainers to account
Nominet UK has updated its Dispute Resolution service (DRS)
from 28 July 2008. Here’s a summary of the three major
changes:
■ Expedited process: in cases where there is no response,
the complainant is given the option of obtaining a
summary decision from an Expert, at a cost of £200 plus
VAT.The expert will not be required to write a full
decision with reasoning, but only to certify that Rights
and Abusive Registration have been made out by the
Complainant;
■ Definition of Rights: The policy now recognises that
Rights may exist in descriptive terms that have acquired
a secondary meaning;
■ Abusive Registration: The Policy confirms that certain
activities such as domaining are not in themselves an
Abusive Registration, but that cases involving
domaining will depend on their particular facts. In
particular paragraph 4(e) of the Policy reads:“Sale of
traffic (i.e. connecting domain names to parking pages
www.comlaude.com
and earning click-per-view revenue) is not of itself
objectionable under the Policy. However, the Expert will
take into account: the nature of the Domain Name; the
nature of the advertising links on any parking page
associated with the Domain Name; and that the use of
the Domain Name is ultimately the Respondent's”
Administrative changes include the introduction of an
Experts Review Group to provide a peer review of decisions
prior to publication, an increase in the word count for
submissions up to 5,000 words and the acceptance of
electronic evidence. Go to:
www.nominet.org.uk/disputes/drs/policyandprocedure/.
AFNIC launches fast new DRS for new
registrations
French registry AFNIC, launched a new dispute resolution
procedure on 22 July 2008 for all registrations under .FR and
.RE (Reunion Island). Based on a French Decree of 6 February
2007, which supplements the French Post and Electronic
Communications Code, the new procedure protects any
name identical to a surname or any name protected by an
intellectual property right in France or in the European Union.
A panel consisting of the CEO and four senior members of
AFNIC appointed by the CEO will analyse complaints brought
under the new Policy and render a decision in cases of
obvious abuse such as where the domain name is identical or
confusingly similar to a trade mark, where the registrant lacks
any legitimate right or interest and is not acting in good faith.
A complaint under the new procedure can be based on
registration or use in bad faith and the remedies are the
transfer or deletion of the domain. It costs €250 plus VAT and
is designed to be simple, fast and effective – though note that
this new procedure appears to be applicable only to domain
names that were registered or renewed on or after 22 July
2008, when it was introduced.
See: http://www.afnic.fr/doc/ref/juridique/parl_en
Part Four
A Miscellany of News and
Views
ICANN Hacked
ICANN and IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
which adds new domain extensions into the world root)
suffered the indignity of having some of their domain names
COM LAUDE 9/10
high-jacked on 27 June 2008, the day after they had
announced the expansion of the gTLD system. ICANN.COM,
ICANN.NET, IANA.COM and IANA-SERVERS.COM were hijacked
by a Turkish group of hackers that calls itself NetDevilz.
Anyone who tried to visit these sites was greeted with a
message that read: "You think that you control the domains
but you don't! Everybody knows wrong. We control the
domains including ICANN! Don't you believe us?"
An ICANN spokesman said the redirection was corrected
within 20 minutes and that an investigation is underway to
determine how the hackers succeeded – though it has been
claimed by commentators that NetDevilz simply sent an
e-mail from an account they had hacked into.
News from the Auctions
Sex.info was sold at auction earlier this month. The first bid
was for $800, the second for $22,000, the fourth for $100,000,
the tenth for $175,000. The 13th and final bid? $202,000
which just exceeded the $200,000 minimum.
Meanwhile Fairwinds, the consultancy run by two former
Register.com sales managers is still trying to sell
Pharmacy.com for $50 million. They’ve sent around over 100
emails to companies they feel should be interested in this
bargain and created a very attractive website. The domainer
community are not impressed. Bloggers claim this is an
astonishing price for an undeveloped domain and point out
that Fairwinds are also CADNA, the Coalition Against Domain
Name Abuse.
How many domains are there?
Chinese surge, Slamming continues
The total number of domains registered across all TLDs was
162 million at the end of Q1 of 2008, claim Verisign, with
ccTLDs numbering 63 million, up 33% over the same quarter
in 2007, thanks largely to double digit growth in China, Poland,
Russia, Spain and France. 14 million new registrations were
filed during the period, up 17% on Q1 2007.
Now it appears that China is overtaking Germany to become
the world's largest country code for domain names with an
average of between 400,000 - 500,000 registrations every
month. At the end of Q2 there were 12,300,000 .CN
registrations compared to 12,098,279 .DE domains.
We know that the Chinese are active filers: appeals from
Slammers to our clients show little sign of abating.The latest
www.comlaude.com
variation comes from CNDNPC. The twist is that they are
actually registering domains, not just threatening to do so.
They will ask for $1,000 but accept $100 if you want to buy
them – though we recommend that our clients tell them that
they are monitoring the domains for activity but will not buy
them. Here’s a copy of one of their emails:
Hello Sir,
We supply domain name protection services. In order to
keep domain names (XXXX-XXXX.cn,XXXXXX.com.cn
from being registered or used in bad faith, we registered
them, and we are about to transfer them to the right owner.
We find them pretty useful to your business, and they are
important to you in the future. We will transfer them to you
if you are interested in them, and charge only a fee for each
domain name.
Sorry for the disturb if any, and welcome to China to visit
Olympic Games.
Best Regards.
CNDNPC
For more information on any of the matters raised here, please
contact us directly: nick.wood@comlaude.com
COM LAUDE
116 Long Acre
Covent Garden
London WC2E 9SU
UK
www.comlaude.com
Tel: +44 (0) 207 836 0070
Disclaimer: Information in this bulletin has been compiled from research at
the domain name registries, directly from sources and over the internet. We
advise you to contact Com Laude at info@comlaude.com before taking any
action in case there are errors due to matters beyond our control.
© Com Laude August 2008.
COM LAUDE 10/10