MarkMonitor Customer Response to New TLDs

November 20, 2008 – 1:58 pm by Fred Felman

 

Before it was apparent that ICANN was pursuing new Top-Level Domains (TLDs) and the publication of the Draft Applicant Guidebook (DAG) which explains the program, we heard no interest whatsoever from our customers on this subject.

 

Since the publication of the DAG, our customers have voiced confusion & anger.  They find the methodology complicated, the expense high, and, most importantly, a potential for abuse that is even greater than in the existing namespace.  As for the opportunity that TLDs present, our customers — most large brand rights holders — are not interested in applying for new TLDs, but may feel forced to do so under the circumstances.  Many of them feel compelled to protect their existing rights - at extreme expense.  Only a small minority of our customers to date have embraced the idea for marketing or other reasons.

 

Universally, every customer we’ve spoken to has expressed concern over the immense scale of trademark abuse in the existing namespace as well as the insufficiency of the tools & great expense of resolving this abuse. Moreover, they worry about the tangible damage to Internet users from fraud and other crimes that are enabled by this abuse.   With the new TLDs, they see much more abuse coming unless ICANN adopts better protections against systemic brand abuse.

 

Many customers asked us to help them make these concerns known to ICANN.  As a result, we are preparing a comment on behalf of our customers that highlight these issues and advocates measures that should help to address them.   We hope that our contribution will result in a more balanced approach that minimizes the expenditures required by our customers to fight brand abuse in the new TLDs.

 

Category: Domains, ICANN | No Comments »

Tags: Domains, icann, tlds, top level domains

Domain Management in the New, New New Economy

November 14, 2008 – 1:39 pm by Elisa Cooper

With the news of yet more corporate downsizing and consumer spending at all time lows, corporations should reevaluate their approach to domain name management. Specifically, companies should focus on ways to maximize portfolio values by selling unused generic registrations, improving website traffic by pointing defensive registrations to live sites, and implementing polices and procedures to ensure that new registrations support defined corporate objectives.

Selling Unused Generic Domains
Many corporate portfolios contain unused generic domains that were purchased years ago with the intent of use. In many instances, corporations are not even aware of the value associated with these “premium domains”. Any unused .com or .net domain containing one or two generic words should be appraised, and potentially sold if there is no plan for future use. With the release of new TLDs in 2010, the value of these domains may potentially decrease over time – so now may be the time to sell.

Improving Website Traffic
The bulk of corporate domain portfolios largely consists of defensive registrations which often include common misspellings, product names and abbreviations. Due to the continued rise in direct navigation to locate web content, directing traffic from these existing registrations to live sites is an easy way to increase the number of website visitors. Pointings can be updated through the use of DNS or a web forwarding solution.

Implementing Defined Domain Policies
Ensuring that defined policies related to what should be registered, which extensions should be covered, and who should have the final approval will help to reduce the number of superfluous registrations. Without defined policies in place, portfolio managers will err on the side of caution, registering any newly liberated ccTLD, even if it does not support online goals or objectives. Implementing a workflow approval process will also ensure that management is aware of domain expenditures, which will be important as budgets are tightened.

While the outlook for the current economy seems uncertain, portfolio managers can definitely play a key role in maximizing value and containing costs associated with domain names.

Category: Domains | No Comments »

Tags: domain management

ICANN - Draft Applicant Guidebook – Overview

October 27, 2008 – 5:01 pm by Fred Felman

 

Last week, ICANN released a draft of the Applicant Guidebook for new top-level domains.   The draft answers many of the questions our customers have asked.

 

Most rights holders will be immediately interested in the modules covering the application process and fees (module 1), evaluation procedures (module 2) and the dispute resolution period (module 3)*.  Those modules provide immediate answers to many important questions about eligibility, direct costs, how applications will be evaluated, and, very important to rights holders, how to object to other applications and under what circumstances they can do so.

 

One critical question that the draft answers is “what are the fees associated with application for a new top level domain?”  At $185,000 the fees were described as “hefty” by CircleID, though many of our customers have expressed relief that the costs are high.  Such a high bar could discourage speculation, hopefully. 

  

“Legal rights holders” should also take some comfort in the fact that the objection process allows rights holders to object to the misuses of their trademarks and that the party that does not prevail in any dispute will bear the cost of the proceedings.  This should further discourage blatant disregard for intellectual property rights by TLD applicants. 

 

The big question for rights holders is what will happen to second-level brand abuse within these new top level domains.  Many rights holders are very concerned about how they will protect their rights within these new top level domains and see this as one of their largest concerns – a topic MarkMonitor will cover in a subsequent blog entry.

 

The draft guidebook leaves some important unanswered questions and brings to light many issues that should be concerns to brand holders.   Overall, the draft document is a step in the right direction in terms of informing the public about the new top level domains and how they’ll be parceled-out.

 

*The 97 page Application Guidebook is organized into the following “modules”**:

 

Module 1:  Introduction to the Application Process

Provides an overview of the application process, documentation requirements,

and fees

 

Module 2:  Evaluation Procedures

Describes the various reviews that occur during the evaluation process and

criteria for approval of applications

 

Module 3:  Dispute Resolution Procedures

Contains the grounds for formal objection by third parties concerning gTLD

applications submitted, and the dispute resolution procedure triggered by an

objection

 

Module 4:  String Contention Procedures

Describes mechanisms for resolving contention when there is more than one

qualified applicant for identical or similar gTLD strings

 

Module 5:  Transition to Delegation

Describes the final steps required of an applicant, including execution of a

registry agreement and completion of pre-delegation tests

 

Module 6:  Terms and Conditions

Contains the terms and conditions applicable to all entities submitting an

application

 

Glossary:

 Contains definitions for terms used in the Applicant Guidebook

 

**Modules and descriptions are quoted directly from the Draft

 

Category: Domains, ICANN | No Comments »

Tags: Domains, gTLDs, icann, top level domains

ICANN Reveals More Detail about New TLDs

October 24, 2008 – 9:26 am by Fred Felman

Today ICANN posted their gTLD Applicant Guidebook  which presents the details on how communities and companies can apply for a new Top Level Domain.

The 97-page document states that the application fee is $185K US plus potential additional fees.  There are gaps in the document as to what will be refunded if an applicant withdraws their application.

Category: Domains, ICANN | No Comments »

Tags: Add new tag, Domains, gTLDs, icann, top level domains

ICANN Announces 45-Day Comment Period on New TLDs Begins October 24th

October 23, 2008 – 11:24 am by Elisa Cooper

 

This week, ICANN announced the release of a series of draft papers that serve as explanatory memoranda for the not yet released Applicant Handbook.

 

These four papers are:

• Resolving String Contention – a complete lifecycle including String Contention Resolution
• Proposed Process for Geographic Names Applications
• Update to DNS Stability Paper – additional Technical Criteria Requirements, including Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs)
• Protection of Rights of Others in New gTLDs

An additional paper covering “Cost Considerations of the New gTLDs Program”, will be published with the Draft Applicant Guidebook before ICANN’s next international meeting in Cairo on November 2, 2008.

According to the ICANN website, a 45-day comment period covering the papers and the Applicant Guidebook will begin on October 24th, 2008.

You can find more information on the ICANN site.

Category: Domains, ICANN | No Comments »

Tags: Domains, gTLDs, icann, top level domains

Kentucky Gambling Domains

October 21, 2008 – 3:14 pm by Elisa Cooper

Last month, a seizure and forfeiture order for 141 domains used to promote, conduct or advance illegal gambling was announced by the state of Kentucky. The list of 141 domains contained popular gambling sites including: fulltiltpoker.com, indiancasino.com, bet21.com, allslots.com, bodoglife.com, bookmaker.com, sportsbook.com, sportsbetting.com, superslots.com, pokerstars.com, doylesroom.com and goldenpalace.com.

Recently the State of Kentucky issued its opinion and order stating that because these domains are viewed as “gambling devices,” they are subject to seizure, and that because these domains have a “presence” in Kentucky, the court has jurisdiction over them.

Domain owners will have 30 days to block website access to Kentucky residents. If they do not comply, the case will proceed and these domains could potentially face permanent shut-down.

So what does this all mean?

·         Does Kentucky have the jurisdiction to seize these domain names?

·         What are the national and international ramifications should Kentucky succeed in this seizure order?

·         What threat does this action pose to the future of Internet freedom and technological innovation?

 

Answers to these questions remain to be seen.

Clearly however, the outcome of this case has the potential to fundamentally impact the way in which domain owners register and manage their portfolios. Moreover, this case has the potential to change the way in which Internet is policed today.

Category: Domains | No Comments »

Tags: Domains, legal

ICANN Top Level Domain Documentation Release - Prelim Schedule

October 17, 2008 – 12:36 pm by Fred Felman

 

According to the announcement, ICANN will NOT have finished the proposed document upon its release.  ICANN states that it will follow-up with more data at a later date.  The sections that will be included are: 

 

1. Introduction to the gTLD Application Process (including the application fee)
2. Evaluation Process
3. Objection and Dispute Resolution
4. String Contention
5. Transition to Delegation
6. Top Level Domain Allocation Terms and Conditions

The proposal and the gTLDs will be discussed in Cairo on Sunday afternoon, November 2, 2008, leaving little time for public review in advance of that gathering.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Category: Domains, ICANN | No Comments »

Tags: Domains, icann, tlds

Pharmaceutical Brandjacking - Controlled Buy

September 18, 2008 – 11:43 am by Fred Felman

 

As part of our recent study of the online pharmaceutical market we decided to make some prescription drug purchases from some of the uncertified online pharmacies that we identified in the study.   

 

Analyzing the purchase details and the product that was shipped to us in this example raises troubling questions about the business practices of the seller.  First, we were able to purchase a prescription drug without a prescription.  Second, even in the outsourced global business world, the geographic distribution of this transaction is at best diverse and certainly suspect.  Third, the site has falsified at least one certification.  And, lastly the brand name product ordered did not match the brand that was delivered.

 

The following points illustrate our purchase experience and the global nature of illicit online pharmacies:

 

1)    The site we bought from represented itself as based in the United States.  In fact, their phone number area code is from Southern California. The site offered brand name  prescription drugs to treat a variety of medical conditions.  We did not have to provide any information about a prescription in order to buy these drugs.

 

 

  

2)     The site falsified a “hacker safe” certification.   They still carry an outdated logo from HackerSafe which is now a McAfee product and their site is not listed among the McAfee Secure certified sites.   

 

  

3)     The IP address of the server hosting their site is in Russia and our credit card was billed from Israel. 

  

4)       The pills were shipped from India.

 

 

 

5)  The pharmaceuticals that we received were a different brand than we ordered.  We believe that the drugs that we received are a simvastatin variant produced for another geographic market.  We can’t speak to the quality or authenticity of these prescription drugs without scientific testing but we do know that we were able to buy a prescription drug very easily without a prescription at this illicit online pharmacy.

 

Online consumers need to be very cautios when buying from prescription drugs online.  Consult the National Board of Pharmacies site for information on VIPPs-certified pharmacies.   

Category: Brandjacking | 2 Comments »

Tags: Brandjacking, counterfeits

New dotBrand Resource Center

September 16, 2008 – 2:34 pm by Te Smith

Category: Uncategorized | No Comments »

Brandjacking Index Examines Online Pharmaceuticals Market

August 28, 2008 – 1:21 pm by Te Smith

We released the Summer 2008 edition of our Brandjacking Index earlier this week.   You can download a copy of the report here.  We publish this report to shed light on the variety of brand abuses that target leading brands and to demonstrate how those abuses can harm the public as well as brands.

For the second year in a row, we analyzed the state of the online pharmaceuticals market and examined online pharmacies, online advertising and B2B exchanges. We used six popular prescription drugs as our filter and found almost 3,000 online pharmacies offering one or more of these drugs; only two of the pharmacies were VIPPS-certified. 

Traffic to these sites had tripled from our study last year and we estimate that these pharmacies are driving approx. $12billion in revenue annually.  These pharmacies are spending serious money, too, in driving business; we estimate almost $26million in search advertising spending for illicit pharmacies for just those six keywords. Listings on B2B exchanges for bulk purchases of patented prescription drugs as well as their APIs (Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients) have grown since 2007; 59% of the listings identified in 2007 were still active during our study period.

The full report has many examples and also discusses our methodology in detail.   The report also discusses general brandjacking trends and phishing.  Cybersquatting continues as the tool of choice for brandjackers and phishers sought out new organizations aggressively; 35% of the organizations phished in Q2 of 2008 were first-time targets.

Press coverage for the report is available on our site, too, so you can see what some members of the press have to say about the Summer 2008 Brandjacking Index.

 

 

Category: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Tags: Brandjacking, cybersquatting, phishing