Spam and Phishing in Q1: New domains revitalise old spam: Kaspersky
[news release] The new range of top level domains, launched in January 2015 and intended for use by relevant communities and organizations, has proved irresistible to spammers according to Kaspersky Lab’s Q1 2015 analysis of the spam and phishing threats landscape. For many the new domains represent an excellent tool for promoting unwanted or illegitimate advertising campaigns.
Spam and phishing statistics
- The proportion of spam in email traffic according to the figures for the first quarter of 2015 was 59.2%, which is 6 percentage points lower than in the previous quarter.
- The USA retained its position as the biggest source of spam, sending 14.5% of unwanted mail.
- Kaspersky Lab products recorded 50,077,057 instances that triggered the “Antiphishing” system. This was 1 million more than in the previous quarter.
- Phishing against customers of financial organizations accounted for 37.06% of all registered incidents.
Kaspersky table showing proportion of spam in email traffic October 2014 – March 2015
New domain scams
The new generic top-level domain (gTLD) registration program gives organizations the opportunity to choose a domain zone that is consistent with their activities and the theme of their sites. For example, job websites can now use a .work domain and scientific websites could choose a .science domain etc. The business opportunities provided by the new gTLD program were enthusiastically endorsed by the Internet community and the active registration of new domain names is ongoing.
Spammers and cybercriminals have also been quick to react to the trend. As a result of their activities, new domain zones almost immediately became an arena for the large-scale distribution of advertising spam, phishing and malicious emails.
According to Kaspersky Lab’s email traffic observations; there was a considerable increase in the number of new domains that sent out spam content in Q1 2015.
Emails sent from the .work domains generally contained offers to carry out various types of work including household maintenance, construction or equipment installation. On the other hand, many of the messages from the .science domains were advertising schools that offer distance learning, colleges to train nurses, criminal lawyers and other professionals.
Q1’s spam traffic also featured many emails sent from color domains such as .pink, .red, or .black. These were often used to advertise Asian dating sites.
“When looking at Q1 in general and the type of spam on the new domains, insurance was one of the hottest topics in terms of the number of messages and the number of changing domains in mass mailings. This covers all types of insurance – life, health, property, cars, animals, and funeral insurance,” said Tatyana Shcherbakova, Senior Spam Analyst at Kaspersky Lab.
To learn more about spam and phishing operations in Q1 2015, please read the blog post available at Securelist.com.
This Kaspersky news release was sourced from:
www.kaspersky.com/about/news/virus/2015/Spam-and-Phishing-in-Q1-New-domains-revitalize-old-spam
posted by David Goldstein
Daily Domain Sales 05-12-2015 lead by GreenInvestments.com at $9,100 on NameJet
GreenInvestments.com sold for $9,100 on NameJet.
Top Domain Sales on May 12, 2015 are :
GreenInvestments.com – $9,100
RoyalTravels.com – $5,000
434.net – $3,851
ApplicationSoftware.com – $3,300
MethodCo.com – $3,288
Vantix.com – $2,342
PatientenInfo.de – $2,231
GreenOrchard.com – $2,000
TheElephantStory.com – $1,888
XATO.com – $1,875
JUZZ.com – $1,760
AllThingsMusic.com – $1,700
VoiceOfBerlin.de – $1,673
EZFare.com – $1,519
MMAGloves.com – $1,515
ARPU.com – $1,513
GatewayLoanService.com – $1,500
OGOL.com – $1,309
BuddhistSociety.org – $1,288
CCML.com – $1,270
TecheSQ.com – $1,250
DryAgedSteaks.com – $1,211
VOIPCloud.com – $1,202
InTannya.com – $1,200
UnusualThings.com – $1,120
ModelJob.com – $1,110
QCDai.com – $1,070
Zanis.com – $1,025
DEAU.com – $1,020
CigShop.com – $1,005
Entrepreneur.email – $1,000
MeditationHut.com – $1,000
AlabamaTile.com – $1,000
LatinoCountry.com – $965
IPUP.com – $960
ClothingFactory.com – $944
FTLEE.com – $911
WSXS.com – $890
AseanIndia.com – $884
ChinaSmartHome.com – $861
VIPCity.com – $822
XPJ55.com – $820
YogaA.com – $812
KingHill.com – $806
BitCoinEE.com – $750
Prospers.com – $745
SodaFactory.com – $719
FJPW.com – $690
GoodLux.com – $670
BitCoin666.com – $666
RoofStore.com – $660
DragonWar.com – $641
BitCoinWTF.com – $600
OMGBitCoins.com – $600
AtBitCoin.com – $599
XREX.com – $570
WinterShop.com – $565
BitCoinFace.com – $560
BaseBallTShirts.com – $531
VisionRacing.com – $505
CCOW.com – $505
OutragedModerates.org – $501
PaperOutlet.com – $499
UnderWearClub.com – $489
MyKikWebCam.com – $480
NowInsurance.com – $468
ClassifiedOntario.com – $453
Peek.ly – $449
NutritionMart.com – $442
IForYou.com – $429
Dameco.com – $420
XViral.com – $410
FlatMax.com – $406
Marketplace-wise Sales
NameJet
GreenInvestments.com – $9,100
Vantix.com – $2,342
JUZZ.com – $1,760
MMAGloves.com – $1,515
OGOL.com – $1,309
DryAgedSteaks.com – $1,211
VOIPCloud.com – $1,202
UnusualThings.com – $1,120
ModelJob.com – $1,110
CigShop.com – $1,005
ClothingFactory.com – $944
FTLEE.com – $911
WSXS.com – $890
VIPCity.com – $822
KingHill.com – $806
Prospers.com – $745
SodaFactory.com – $719
FJPW.com – $690
RoofStore.com – $660
CCOW.com – $505
PaperOutlet.com – $499
UnderWearClub.com – $489
NutritionMart.com – $442
RoyalTravels.com – $5,000
434.net – $3,851
PatientenInfo.de – $2,231
VoiceOfBerlin.de – $1,673
Entrepreneur.email – $1,000
ApplicationSoftware.com – $3,300
XATO.com – $1,875
EZFare.com – $1,519
ARPU.com – $1,513
Zanis.com – $1,025
IPUP.com – $960
AseanIndia.com – $884
YogaA.com – $812
DragonWar.com – $641
XREX.com – $570
WinterShop.com – $565
BaseBallTShirts.com – $531
VisionRacing.com – $505
OutragedModerates.org – $501
MyKikWebCam.com – $480
ClassifiedOntario.com – $453
Dameco.com – $420
FlatMax.com – $406
BuyDomains
MethodCo.com – $3,288
GreenOrchard.com – $2,000
TheElephantStory.com – $1,888
AllThingsMusic.com – $1,700
BuddhistSociety.org – $1,288
TecheSQ.com – $1,250
Flippa
GatewayLoanService.com – $1,500
InTannya.com – $1,200
LatinoCountry.com – $965
BitCoinEE.com – $750
BitCoin666.com – $666
BitCoinWTF.com – $600
OMGBitCoins.com – $600
AtBitCoin.com – $599
BitCoinFace.com – $560
Peek.ly – $449
XViral.com – $410
DropCatch
CCML.com – $1,270
QCDai.com – $1,070
DEAU.com – $1,020
ChinaSmartHome.com – $861
XPJ55.com – $820
GoodLux.com – $670
NowInsurance.com – $468
IForYou.com – $429
Fabulous
MeditationHut.com – $1,000
AlabamaTile.com – $1,000
Controversial .SUCKS Lashes Out At ICANN Threatening Legal Action
The scourge of new gTLDs among brand owners has hit out at ICANN accusing it of making “false allegations” and disseminating “defamatory statements” against it. And they lay the blame for some of the highest prices for domain names squarely with ICANN, saying that everything they are doing was outlined in the application and contract for .sucks.
The move follows a complaint from ICANN’s Intellectual Property Constituency that led to ICANN asking both the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and, because Vox Populi is a Canadian enterprise, Canada’s Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA), to consider assessing and determining whether or not Vox Populi is violating any of the laws or regulations those agencies enforce.
And what could be seen as an attempt at a sugar-coated makeover, without really changing anything, the .sucks registry operator Vox Populi Registry has abandoned the .sucks “Sunrise Premium” brand in favour of a new “Market Premium” service, telling Domain Incite it ‘is just a renaming, designed to reduce confusion among trademark owners.’
In a letter to ICANN from the .sucks registry operator’s law firm [see below], ICANN is accused of repeating and adopting “the ICANN IPC’s baseless allegations that Vox Populi has engaged in ‘illicit’ activities, and that Vox Populi’s practices are ‘predatory, exploitive and coercive.’ Your letter went even further, asking the FTC to investigate whether Vox Populi has engaged in any ‘illegal’ activities.”
“None of the letters in question identifies any manner in which any law might actually have been broken; instead they merely suggest (without explanation or logic) that Vox Populi’s pricing may lead to ‘cybersquatting’ that could damage trademark owners.”
And later in the letter, the lawyers claim that:
“In sending these public letters, and making the false allegations contained therein, ICANN has disseminated defamatory statements about Vox Populi and its business practices aimed at depriving Vox Populi of the benefits of its contract with ICANN. These actions further violate the duty of good faith and fair dealing that is implied in every contract. They also contravene ICANN’s own policies and statements of purpose. Finally, in suggesting illegality without any basis whatsoever, your actions (and those of the ICANN IPC and ICANN BC) have given rise to defamation claims against ICANN. Vox Populi hereby demands that ICANN, including any and all of its subdivisions, cease any and all such activity immediately.”
The letter notes the registry wanted to make money out of brands through some of the highest Sunrise fees but blames this squarely at ICANN’s feet.
“In accordance with the decisions that ICANN itself made, Vox Populi may set the price for these registrations to capture such value and at a level that the market will bear. Regardless of ICANN’s inflammatory characterizations of Vox Populi’s pricing, these prices, and the manner in which they were set, in no way violate Vox Populi’s contract with ICANN or any laws.”
The letter concludes:
To be clear, Vox Populi has no interest in pursuing claims at this time. We believe that the FTC and the OCA will recognize quickly that there are simply no factual allegations that warrant any investigation and that ICANN has identified no laws or regulations under the FTC’s or the OCA’s purview that have been violated in any way. As a result, it is our hope that your letter has merely resulted in some passing, unfortunate publicity. However, if ICANN or any of its constituent bodies (or any directly responsible member thereof) engages in any further wrongful activity that prevents the company from fulfilling its contractual obligations and operating the .SUCKS registry as both ICANN and Vox Populi envisioned, the company will have no choice but to pursue any and all remedies available to it.”
“This letter is written reserving all rights, and does not constitute a waiver of any claims for past actions taken by ICANN or any committee or division thereof.”
The letter has been reproduced in full below:
May 11, 2015
John O. Jeffrey
General Counsel & Secretary
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094
Re: Vox Populi Registry Agreement
Dear Mr. Jeffrey,
This firm represents ICANN’s contractual partner, Vox Populi Registry (“Vox Populi”). I write regarding your letter to The Honorable Edith Ramirez, the Chairwoman of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), and The Honorable John Knubley, the Deputy Minister of Canada’s Office of Consumer Affairs (“OCA”), dated April 9, 2015, which forwarded a complaint letter from the ICANN Intellectual Property Constituency (“ICANN IPC”), and repeated and adopted the ICANN IPC’s baseless allegations that Vox Populi has engaged in “illicit” activities, and that Vox Populi’s practices are “predatory, exploitive and coercive.” Your letter went even further, asking the FTC to investigate whether Vox Populi has engaged in any “illegal” activities. More recently, ICANN’s Business Constituency (“ICANN BC”) sent letters to Ms. Ramirez and Mr. Knubley, as well as to Akram Atallah, President of ICANN’s Global Domains Division, which further republished and expanded upon these allegations.
None of the letters in question identifies any manner in which any law might actually have been broken; instead they merely suggest (without explanation or logic) that Vox Populi’s pricing may lead to “cybersquatting” that could damage trademark owners. At the same time, though, the ICANN IPC’s letter expressly recognizes that registrations on Vox Populi’s .SUCKS registry are subject to ICANN’s various trademark dispute resolution processes, which protect trademark owners from cybersquatting. And although the ICANN BC letter to the FTC and the OCA asserts that ICANN “does not wish to limit free speech or prevent criticism of any business,” the only coherent expression of any potential concern is that businesses may feel compelled to register their trademarks “to defend [their] reputation from critics or competitors controlling their brand domain in .sucks and using it unfairly to criticize their products or services.” To the extent such competitive use or criticism is unfair, trademark owners have a full complement of remedies that they can seek both through ICANN’s dispute procedures and the laws of various different nations. As a result, it would seem that ICANN is not actually concerned about cybersquatting or any other illegal activity. Rather, ICANN appears concerned that registrations on the .SUCKS registry will be used to aggregate uncomplimentary commentary about companies and products–the very purpose for the registry that Vox Populi identified in the application it submitted to ICANN, and that ICANN approved.
In sending these public letters, and making the false allegations contained therein, ICANN has disseminated defamatory statements about Vox Populi and its business practices aimed at depriving Vox Populi of the benefits of its contract with ICANN. These actions further violate the duty of good faith and fair dealing that is implied in every contract. They also contravene ICANN’s own policies and statements of purpose. Finally, in suggesting illegality without any basis whatsoever, your actions (and those of the ICANN IPC and ICANN BC) have given rise to defamation claims against ICANN. Vox Populi hereby demands that ICANN, including any and all of its subdivisions, cease any and all such activity immediately.
As you know, on December 22, 2014, ICANN and Vox Populi entered into a contract under which ICANN voluntarily granted Vox Populi the fight to operate the registry for ICANN’s .SUCKS top level domain (“TLD”) in exchange for financial compensation. The benefits of having a .SUCKS TLD have been recognized by consumer advocates for more than a decade. As early as 2000, well known consumer rights champions such as Ralph Nader and James Love petitioned ICANN to create a .SUCKS TLD, arguing that “[t]his TLD will be used to facilitate criticism of a firm or organization, such as aol.sucks, wipo.sucks, or even greenpeace.sucks …. The domain would also be available for other uses, such as work.sucks, life.sucks, or television.sucks.” The concept of a TLD that facilitates and aggregates legitimate complaints about companies and organizations is entirely consistent with the policies and stated goals of ICANN and the Internet community. As Mr. Nader noted fifteen years ago, it has always been understood that “the .sucks TLD will be offensive to some people,” but it has nonetheless been recognized that the creation of the .SUCKS TLD will be beneficial because it will promote “free speech rights of individuals and small organizations.”
And, of course, ICANN was fully aware of the goals and purpose of the .SUCKS registry when it entered into its contractual relationship with Vox Populi. Indeed, Vox Populi stated the purpose of the .SUCKS registry expressly in its registry application:
The term “sucks” resonates around the globe, its intention is clear and understood. But it is now more than an epithet; it is a call to action. Whether registered by an activist or an executive, this new landscape will be devoted to encouraging an accelerated and legitimate dialog that can lead to improved customer satisfaction and market share.
There are few, if any, places for raw consumer commentary and corporate interests to cohere. The .SUCKS name space will enable the benefits of a dialogue without dampening its usual initial vehemence. With its specific focus, it will make it even easier for consumers to find, suggest, cajole, complain and engage on specific products, services and companies.
Vox Populi recognized the tensions that a registry specifically targeted to channeling consumer complaints might create. As a consequence, it was careful to include in its application provisions to address any concerns about abuse by registrants. As required by ICANN’s application procedures, Vox Populi agreed to comply with ICANN’s Uniform Dispute Resolution Procedures (“UDRP”), Uniform Rapid Suspension System (“URS”), trademark post- delegation dispute resolution procedure (“Trademark PDDRP”), and Sunrise Dispute Resolution System, each of which has been designed and implemented by ICANN to address those circumstances where a trademark owner believes that a registrant or a registration has infringed its rights or used a domain improperly. As a result, trademark owners are protected from abuse on the .SUCKS registry to the exact same degree that they are on any other registry.
Beyond that, Vox Populi voluntarily adopted policies to immediately address any registrant that uses a registration to engage in bullying. It implemented policies banning pornography on the .SUCKS registry, and it specifically adopted a “no parking policy” to prevent registrants from registering domains without making active use of the site. In all respects, Vox Populi has been scrupulous in implementing policies that are designed to advance the very goals that have been recognized as beneficial for the Internet community for more than a decade.
ICANN reviewed Vox Populi’s application and approved it. ICANN also reviewed Vox Populi’s launch plan and sunrise policies, approved them as well, and provided a launch schedule on which Vox Populi has relied.
In addition, ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), which includes as a member a senior policy advisor in the US Department of Commerce–the governmental agency that has overseen ICANN since its inception–specifically reviewed and commented on Vox Populi’s registry application. The GAC’s only comment was that ICANN should require the other applicants for the .SUCKS registry to include the non-bullying clause that Vox Populi already had in its application. In essence, the GAC recognized that Vox Populi’s application went above and beyond what was appropriate and responsible.
Based on the extensive review of Vox Populi’s application, ICANN entered into a contract with the company to manage the .SUCKS registry. In entering into this agreement, Vox Populi understood the value of the .SUCKS registry–both the value to the Internet community as an outlet for open discussion, and the value to Vox Populi as a business. Multiple parties submitted applications to obtain the .SUCKS registry, an auction was conducted among those qualified applicants, and Vox Populi’s successful bid was based on its appraisal of that value and the assumption that ICANN would not interfere in its ability to manage the registry in accordance with its contractual obligations. The registry agreement itself contains specific financial obligations that Vox Populi is required to meet. And, as with all new TLD registries, ICANN made a specific, considered decision not to regulate the price at which domain names would be sold. In a recent response letter to the President of the ICANN IPC, Akram Atallah, the President of ICANN’s Global Domains Division, noted that the imposition of price restrictions on new TLDs like the .SUCKS registry would be detrimental to the Internet.
As you will recall, there was extensive discussion of whether price caps or controls should be included in new gTLD registry agreements when the new gTLD program was formulated. In furtherance of such discussions, ICANN engaged an expert economic consultant to study the issue. The expert concluded that price caps or ceilings were not necessary or desirable, that the imposition of price caps might inhibit the development and marketplace acceptance of new gTLDs, and that trademark holders’ rights could be protected through alternate rights protection mechanisms, such as the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS), the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), or trademark post-delegation dispute resolution procedure (Trademark PDDRP) you reference in your letter. Both before and after the study was released, this issue was thoroughly discussed and debated by members of the global multistakeholder community, and ultimately the determination was made not to impose price caps or price controls in the new gTLD registry agreements.
Consistent with both its contractual rights, and with the policy conclusions outlined in the study conducted by ICANN’s own economic consultant, Vox Populi has priced the domains on the .SUCKS registry at levels that it believes are consistent with market value. Specifically, during the sunrise period, Vox Populi charges registrars $1999 for each domain registered on the .SUCKS registry, with a suggested retail price of $2499. Registrars are, of course, free to set the ultimate price to registrants as they see fit. Currently in the market, there are registrars selling domains for as low as $2024 and as high as $3977.99. Once the sunrise period has passed, Vox Populi will wholesale most .SUCKS domains to registrars at $199, with a suggested retail price of $249. Again, registrars will decide the retail price as they see fit. As with virtually all new TLD registries, these prices are set above the costs incurred by Vox Populi in operating the registry.
The prices for a.SUCKS registration are higher than those set by many other registries (though not all), particularly with respect to the sunrise period. In its registry application, Vox Populi recognized that a trademark owner’s .SUCKS domain would be of significant value to a trademark owner to allow consumers to voice their concerns and engage in constructive dialogue with dissatisfied consumers. The original proposal for the formation of a.SUCKS registry put forward by consumer advocates would have banned companies from owning their own trademarks on the registry. In accordance with ICANN’s Rights Protection Mechanism, however, Vox Populi has permitted trademark owners to purchase their trademarks as domains, and has granted those trademark owners the exclusive right to purchase their trademarks as domains during the mandatory sunrise period. In its application, Vox Populi noted that, “[b]y building an easy-to-locate, ‘central town square’ available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, the .SUCKS registry will become a recognized destination not just for [] one company, but for all. It will give assurances to customers that their voice can be heard. And it can become an essential part of every company’s customer relationship management program.” In this way, the .SUCKS registry provides significant value to those trademark owners who wish to avail themselves of the opportunity to register their trademark as a domain. In accordance with the decisions that ICANN itself made, Vox Populi may set the price for these registrations to capture such value and at a level that the market will bear. Regardless of ICANN’s inflammatory characterizations of Vox Populi’s pricing, these prices, and the manner in which they were set, in no way violate Vox Populi’s contract with ICANN or any laws.
Notwithstanding the fact that Vox Populi has operated in every respect in accordance with the letter, spirit, and intent of its agreement with ICANN, the ICANN IPC sent an inflammatory letter filled with spurious allegations to the president of ICANN’s Global Domains Division, and you endorsed and forwarded that letter to the FTC. More recently, ICANN’s BC sent similar letters to the Global Domains Division, as well at the FTC and the OPC. These letters contain too many factual misrepresentations to catalogue, but in the end they accuse Vox Populi of operating a “predatory scheme” that somehow makes it more likely that trademark owners’ names will be registered by “cybersquatters.” Of course, the argument makes no sense, because to the extent that a trademark owner’s brand is registered as a domain by a cybersquatter, that trademark owner can avail itself of the remedies Vox Populi has provided through ICANN’s own UDRP, URS or Trademark TDDRP procedures. As a result, it seems clear that ICANN is not concerned with trademark infringement or cybersquatting (for which everyone agrees there exist ready remedies), but is actually concerned that the .SUCKS registry may be used for the very purpose ICANN already approved–namely (as outlined in Vox Populi’s registry application), “to create a new address on the web that will give voice to consumers,” to provide a forum “for raw consumer commentary,” and to “make it even easier for consumers to find, suggest, cajole, complain and engage on specific products, services and companies.”
As Vox Populi’s contractual partner and the regulatory entity that approved of the stated purposes of the .SUCKS registry, upon receipt of the ICANN IPC complaint letter, ICANN’s appropriate response should have been to respond to the ICANN IPC and ask for some specific basis for the complaints. At the very least, it would have been appropriate to forward the complaint letter to Vox Populi to give the company the opportunity to respond before taking any action based on the allegations. Unfortunately, ICANN took neither of these reasonable actions. Instead, ICANN forwarded the defamatory allegations to the FTC and the OCA, in the process endorsing the allegations and further asserting that Vox Populi has engaged in “illicit,” “illegal” activity that has been “predatory, exploitive and coercive.” Your letter identifies no law that has been broken, no regulation that has been transgressed, and no contractual provision that has been breached. Rather, it makes broad, sweeping allegations without any factual support, and republishes the falsehoods of the ICANN IPC’s initial complaint letter. The ICANN BC letters cite statutory provisions, but offer no explanations as to how Vox Populi’s actions in any way transgress those provisions. And while the ICANN BC suggests that Vox Populi has violated its agreement with ICANN, it sites to no contractual obligation or provision that it alleges has been violated.
As I am sure you are aware, every contractual relationship carries with it an implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing. Digerati Holdings, LLC v. Young Money Entm ‘t, LLC, 194 Cal. App. 4th 873, 885, 123 Cal. Rptr. 3d 736, 745 (2011) (“Every contract contains an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing providing that no party to the contract will do anything that would deprive another party of the benefits of the contract.”). In this instance, notwithstanding the fact that Vox Populi has fulfilled every aspect of its obligations, and operated fully within the expectations of the parties, ICANN has chosen to take action to harm Vox Populi’s ability to operate within the registry agreement and has breached its obligation to conduct itself in good faith. In addition, ICANN’s actions are in contravention of its stated core values and policies. For example, in Article 3 of Vox Populi’s registry agreement, ICANN covenanted that, “[c]onsistent with ICANN’s expressed mission and core values, ICANN shall operate in an open and transparent manner.” It is hard to consider ICANN in compliance with this covenant when one of its internal constituencies writes a complaint letter to one of the organization’s divisions about Vox Populi, and an officer in another section of the organization forwards that letter asking for an investigation into “illegal” activity without even seeking a response from Vox Populi first. Finally, ICANN’s actions constitute defamation and trade libel that are fully actionable outside of the arbitration provisions of the registry agreement. Goldline, LLC v. Regal Assets, LLC, 2015 WL 1809301, at * 5 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 21, 2015) (Commercial disparagement or defamation specifically involves injury to the reputation of a business rather than disparagement of quality of goods or services.). Indeed, these concerns are heightened by the fact that the ICANN IPC is made up, in part, of owners of other registries that will be competing with the .SUCKS registry.
We hereby demand that ICANN refrain from taking any further action in the future to impede Vox Populi’s ability to operate the new TLD .SUCKS registry in accordance with its contractual rights and obligations. To the extent that ICANN, the ICANN IPC or any other ICANN constituencies engage in any further wrongful activities designed to injure Vox Populi, or prevent the operation of the registry, the company will take any and all actions necessary to protect its rights.
To be clear, Vox Populi has no interest in pursuing claims at this time. We believe that the FTC and the OCA will recognize quickly that there are simply no factual allegations that warrant any investigation and that ICANN has identified n___o_o laws or regulations under the FTC’s or the OCA’s purview that have been violated in any way. As a result, it is our hope that your letter has merely resulted in some passing, unfortunate publicity. However, if ICANN or any of its constituent bodies (or any directly responsible member thereof) engages in any further wrongful activity that prevents the company from fulfilling its contractual obligations and operating the .SUCKS registry as both ICANN and Vox Populi envisioned, the company will have no choice but to pursue any and all remedies available to it.
This letter is written reserving all rights, and does not constitute a waiver of any claims for past actions taken by ICANN or any committee or division thereof.
Sincerely,
R. David Hosp
Cc:
Mr . Akram Atallah, President, Global Domains Divisions, ICANN
Mr . Cherine Chalaby, Chair, Board New gTLD Program Committee, ICANN
Mr . Fadi Chehad6, President and Chief Executive Officer, ICANN
Mr. Steve Crocker, Chair, Board of Directors, ICANN
Mr . Allen Grogan, Chief Contract Compliance Officer, ICANN
TheHonorable Edith Ramirez, Chairwoman, United States Federal Trade Commission The Honorable Pamela Miller, Representative for Canada, Government Advisory Committee, ICANN
The Honorable Suzanne Radell, Representative for United States of America, Government Advisory Committee, ICANN
The Honorable John Knubley, Deputy Minister, Canada’s Office of Consumer Affairs The Honorable Thomas Schneider, Chair, Govemment Advisory Committee, ICANN
The Honorable Lawrence Stickling, Assistance Secretary for Communications and Information and Administrator, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
written by David Goldstein
ICANN: Proposed Renewal of .TRAVEL Sponsored TLD Registry Agreement
Purpose (Brief): This public comment proceeding seeks input on the proposed agreement for renewal of the 2005 Registry Agreement for .TRAVEL which is set to expire on 21 July 2015.
This proposal is a result of discussions between ICANN and Tralliance Registry Management Company, LLC (the Registry Operator for the .TRAVEL TLD).
Public Comment Box Link: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/travel-renewal-2015-05-12-en
Comment Period Opens on 12 May 2015
This ICANN announcement was sourced from:
https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-05-12-en
posted by David Goldstein
Q1 Highest Reported .COM Domain Name Sales
Porno.com was the highest reported .COM domain name sale in the first quarter of 2015. The domain name changed hands for a whopping $8,888,888 in February.
Here are the highest reported .COM domain name sales in the first quarter of 2015:
1. Porno.com $8,888,888 Pvt Sale
2. 345.com $800,000
3. NL.com $575,000
4. Rangers.com $375,000
5. HomeCare.com $350,000
6. Heika.com $300,000
7.tie Werk.com $250,000
7.tie Connaught.com $250,000
9. ErectileDysfunction.com $241,000
10. Shisha.com $190,000
11. Amber.com $180,000
12. tie Luxe.com $172,500
13. tie Classic.com $172,500
14. MyMeeting.com $164,100
15. HQB.com $160,000
16.tie CurrencyConverter.com $150,000
16.tie Rapunzel.com $150,000
16.Timeless.com $150,000
20.tie Response.com $150,000
20.tie ClearCare.com $140,000
20.tie W8.com $140,000
