OECD Report: The Economics of Transition to IPv6
This report makes the case that IPv6 represents an example of a platform; within the context of IPv6, the sides of the platform are Internet service providers, backbone providers, device manufacturers, content providers, and so forth. The net benefits to adopting the new platform are not distributed equally across sides.
For some participants, such as backbone and transit providers and manufacturers of devices such as routers, the transition to IPv6 has been relatively swift. For these participants the benefits of adoption were clear, and adoption demonstrated the technical ability of the company and fitness of its network.
For others, such as many content providers for the Web, enterprises contemplating deployment of IPv6 within internal firm networks, and providers of consumer electronics equipment such as DVD or Blu-Ray players or televisions, the transition has been slower. For them the benefits have not been as clear, and many legacy devices, networks, customers and suppliers have not transitioned.
This OECD report is available for download from:
www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/the-economics-of-transition-to-internet-protocol-version-6-ipv6_5jxt46d07bhc-en
Robert Downey Jr. Wins RobertDowneyJr.Actor Domain Name
An arbitrator with the National Arbitration Forum has recently awarded the domain name RobertDowneyJr.actor to Robert Downey Jr.The actor submitted the complaint on September 24,2014.
Robert Downey Junior filed the Complaint as a UDRP even though the disputed domain name is a new gTLD.
According to whois records, the domain name was first registered this August by Shashank Agarwal, a man who lives in India.
Shashank said that he is “publicly known by ‘Robert Downey Jr’ as a screen name in order to pursue his career in the indian [sic] cinema more popularly known as ‘Bollywood’…Respondent purchased [<robertdowneyjr.actor>]… in order to publish [his] web portfolio” to gain exposure. Respondent claims to have “no knowledge of the American Hollywood actor Mr. Robert Downey Junior prior to the fact of this arbitration, belonging to a third world country and having a native language other than English.” Respondent noted that his “portfolio website is still in development phase…”
The respondent failed to submit any evidence regarding the development of his portfolio site.
Robert Downey Junior managed to establish all three elements required under the ICANN Policy and the Panel ordered the disputed domain name to be transferred from the respondent to the complainant.
You can read the decision here .
KickAssTorrents Moves to Kickass.so Domain
KickAssTorrents announced recently that they moved to a new domain name : Kickass.so , as part of their “annual rotation”.
KickAssTorrents is one of the largest torrent sites. The site’s operators may have decided to relocate to a new domain name because of the anti-piracy measures.
KickAssTorrents has moved over the years from domain name to domain name in order to evade law enforcement. At the time of writing this article, KAT is one of the largest torrent sites in the world, with millions of unique visitors each day. The torrent competes with The Pirate Bay.
“We are moving to kickass.so now. As you know we change our domain regularly. Nothing more has been changed for you, so don’t worry, you can use Kickass as usually, it’s automatically redirected,” said the torrent’s operators.
ICANN Announces UDRP Policy Implementation Update
ICANN announces the implementation of amended rules for the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ( UDRP ).
UDRP
The UDRP is a consensus policy that is applicable to all ICANN -accredited registrars. The updates include:
- “Lock” and “pendency” are now defined terms in the UDRP Rules;
- UDRP complainants no longer have to transmit a copy of the complaint to the respondent (rule 3(b)(xii));
- Rule 4(b) requires registrars to lock the disputed domain name(s) within two (2) business days of receiving a UDRP complaint from a UDRP provider;
- Rule 4(e) provides that when a UDRP provider informs the registrar that the UDRP proceeding has been withdrawn or dismissed, the registrar must remove the lock within one (1) business day of receiving notice;
- Rule 5(b) provides that respondents may request an additional four (4) calendar days to respond to a complaint and UDRP providers will automatically grant the extension, if requested;
- Rule 16(a) provides that registrars must notify the parties, the provider and ICANN of the date for implementation of the decision within three (3) business days of receiving the decision from the provider;
- Rule 17 outlines a new procedure to be used in cases that are settled between parties outside the UDRP case.
These amendments to the UDRP rules were designed to reduce the risk of cyberflight during a UDRP proceeding.
A link to a redline version of the amended UDRP Rules can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/udrp-rules-redline-24sep14-en.pdf [PDF, 204 KB]
Background
On 23 September 2013, the ICANN Board adopted the GNSO Council Policy Recommendations on the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings as set forth in the Final Report (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/locking/domain-name-final-05jul13-en.pdf [PDF, 1.01 MB]).
The Generic Names Supporting Organization ( GNSO ) unanimously approved at its meeting on 1 August 2013 the recommendations of the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings PDP Working Group. The 17 recommendations are intended to clarify and standardize the process for locking of a domain name subject to UDRP Proceedings, including:
- Definition of “locking”
- Requiring registrar to apply lock within 2 business days following request for verification
- Removing obligation for complainant to notify the respondent at the time of filing, but add automatic extension of 4 days to response time upon request
- Step by step clarification of requirements of different parties involved
- Development of educational and informational materials to assist in informing affected parties of new requirements and recommended best practices
Following ICANN Board approval, an Implementation Review Team (” IRT “), comprised of GNSO Working Group members, was convened and worked with ICANN staff in drafting the amended UDRP Rules. ICANN staff held regular meetings with the IRT to ensure that the recommendations were implemented in accordance with the Working Group’s intent.
Effective Date
These new requirements will take effect and will be enforced by ICANN as of 31 July 2015. All ICANN -accredited registrars are required to comply by this date.
This ICANN announcement was sourced from:
https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-11-17-en
Mobile.co Owner Acquires Mobile.co.com and Movil.CO.com for $32,000
Mobile.co owners has recently acquire the domain names Mobile.co.com and Movil.CO.com for $32,000,according to the .co.com registry.
co.com LLC announced that Mobile.co.com was sold for $25,000 and Movil.co.com was sold for $7,000.The sale was brokered by Igloo.com.
“We are very pleased to have an innovative company like Mobile Corporation acquire these domains names. Their interest in securing these premium .co.com domains, further validates the value of short memorable domain names ending in .com,” said Ken Hansen, CEO. Co.com LLC.
“The .co.com extension is an attractive alternative given the many keywords and brandable names that are available. Companies in the countries with existing .co.ccTLD and com.ccTLD extensions (e.g. co.UK, com.au) will find .co.com particularly attractive given the ubiquity of third-level domain names in those markets.” added Tessa Holcomb, CEO, Igloo.
According to whois records, both Movil.CO.com and Mobile.co.com were first registered in February 2014.
Congratulations to both the buyer and the seller.
