New ICANN Chief on gTLDs

In a recent Washington Post article, Rod Beckstrom, former Director of the National Cyber Security Center and ICANN’s newly appointed CEO, provided his initial views on ICANN, and its plans for the launch of new gTLDs.

According to the article, Mr. Beckstrom said that he was “a bit overwhelmed by the tremendous complexity of issues on the table.” He added, “(ICANN) is perhaps the most complex, multi-stakeholder environment (he has) ever seen.”

In terms of the new gTLDs, Mr. Beckstrom stated that “ICANN is receiving a lot of pressure from many companies around the world who want new gTLDs…who want them opened up and available.”  

He continued “the solution is not avoiding the gTLDs, because there’s tremendous demand from all over the world to have those, and the number of companies who are opposing them appear to be a minority compared to those who think they should be out there and present.”

Mr. Beckstrom is likely hearing the cacophony of voices from ICANN’s ‘contracted’ parties, registries and registrars, as well as newly announced registries that intend to make the most of the new namespace.  Several new registries announced their intent to apply for a new gTLD with splashy events and celebrity guests at the meeting held last week in Sydney.  Many of these new proposed registries have large amounts of capital invested and are eager to put their money to work.

While the companies that enable and support new gTLDs are certainly among those clamoring for their launch, MarkMonitor has yet to hear many large corporations expressing a similar desire. In fact, of the many conversations I’ve had with rights owners, there are precious few brand owners who have expressed their desire for the launch of new gTLDs. However, many corporations will be forced to participate in some way to protect their rights or for competitive reasons.

We are sure that Mr. Beckstrom will have a chance to hear more of the voices that represent other ICANN stakeholders, including Internet users and rights owners who are endangered by domain name system abuse, before he must make decisions about the new gTLDs.  His writings in his book “The Starfish and the Spider” indicate that he has an appreciation for smart organizations and the importance of reputation and respects the wisdom of crowds.

Category: ICANN, gTLDs | No Comments »

Tags: Beckstrom, gTLDs, icann

ICANN to Host New gTLD Outreach Events

The events are scheduled to occur: 

• Wednesday, June 24th in Sydney during the 35th ICANN Meeting
• Monday, July 13th in New York
• Wednesday, July 15th in London
• Friday, July 24th in Hong Kong
• TBD in Abu Dhabi

Additional locations are under consideration, as well as a series of topic-specific webinars.  

All events are free of charge, but space is limited and preference will be given to first-time attendees to any of the consultation sessions.  

Remote participation will be available and ICANN will be providing additional details.  

Detailed information about these events is available at http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/consultation-outreach-en.htm.  

Pre-registrations can be submitted at http://www.registration123.com/ICANN/GTLD/.  

Please note that July 10, 2009 is the last day to register for the New York and London events.

Category: Domains, ICANN, gTLDs | No Comments »

Tags: gTLD, icann, New gTLD

Google Relaxes AdWords Trademark Policy

Google recently made two noteworthy changes to its AdWords trademark policy, easing restrictions both in the U.S. and in 188 other geographies:

• In the US:  under “certain criteria,” an advertiser can use trademarks in its ad text even if the advertiser doesn’t own that trademark or have explicit approval from the trademark owner to use it. 
• In 188 geographies (mostly non-European Union):  an advertiser can use a trademark owned by another party as a keyword to trigger an ad when searches are conducted on those trademarks.  This new policy is consistent with Google’s trademark policy for 4 other countries, including the U.S. 

A complete list of the 192 countries in which Google will not investigate the use of trademarks as keywords, but will continue to investigate the use of trademarks in ad text, can be found here.  

The U.S. policy change will begin appearing in Google search ads on June 15, 2009.   The trademark policy impacting the 188 countries took effect on June 4, 2009.

HOW DO THE POLICIES DIFFER FROM BEFORE?

Previously in the U.S., an advertiser could only purchase a trademark as a “keyword” to trigger an ad, but the advertiser could not use it in the ad text unless the advertiser was, or had permission from, the trademark owner. 

Previously in the 188 geographies, if advertisers purchased a trademark they didn’t own as a keyword to trigger an ad, trademark owners could submit a complaint to Google to have it disapproved or disabled.  It should be noted that Google did not proactively prevent ads triggered by the trademarks of others in these countries, but instead was willing to review complaints and take appropriate action.

WHAT ARE THE “CERTAIN CRITERIA” IN THE NEW U.S. POLICY?

The certain criteria that must be met are that the advertiser’s website must:

• Resell the trademarked goods and services
• Sell components, replacement parts, or compatible products relating to the trademark
• Provide information relating to the trademarked goods or services (without promoting or selling competitive offerings)

At the same time, Google’s U.S. policy does not allow ads that:

• Do not lead to a landing page which clearly facilitates the sale of either the trademarked goods and services OR parts or components related to the goods and services corresponding to the trademark
• Are competitive or critical about the goods and services corresponding to the trademark
• Do not lead to a landing page which provides substantive information about the trademarked goods and services
• Sell or promote counterfeit goods

WHY THE CHANGES?

Google claims the U.S. policy change will improve ad quality and the user experience.  For example, a site that sells several brands of sporting goods would now be able to highlight the actual brands they sell in their ad text, rather than generically referring to the goods. 

Google’s other trademark policy change brings most of the world in line with Google’s existing policies to allow keyword buying in 4 other countries:  U.S., Canada, United Kingdom and Ireland

HOW DO THESE POLICY CHANGES IMPACT BRAND OWNERS?

Google’s lifting of policy restrictions places more responsibility on brand owners to police whether their trademarks are being infringed upon in Google search ads.   Many brand owners fear that the U.S. policy change will support more gray market selling – that is, the selling of authentic product through unauthorized sellers – as the policy now will allow any seller to use the names of the brands it sells in Google ads.  If a seller does use the trademark of a brand owner without permission, the brand owner can now only request Google to remediate the ad if the advertisement does not meet the “certain criteria” listed above.

Some brand owners have also expressed concern that the new international policy will create more opportunities for others to inappropriately leverage their brands, as any third party – including competitors – can now use others’ trademarks to trigger ads in these 188 geographies. 

WHAT CAN BRAND OWNERS DO?

Google does provide a complaint procedure that allows brand owners to file a trademark complaint.  Google will then determine whether the ad(s) are compliant with the trademark policy for that geography and take appropriate action, which may include disapproving or disabling the ad and/or terminating the advertiser.  Google has a similar complaint procedure for ads selling or promoting counterfeit goods.

Brand owners can also contact the advertiser directly, such as through a Cease & Desist letter, to remedy a trademark infringement.  Google actually recommends on its website that “trademark owners …resolve their disputes directly with the advertiser” as “Google is not a third-party arbiter.”

Given Google is relaxing its trademark policy, it makes it even more imperative that brand owners proactively monitor sponsored links to ensure that third parties are not abusing their trademarks in search ads.  While Google is lifting restrictions on who can use trademarks in search ads and how trademarks are used, it does not allow ads that are competitive or critical in nature or that sell or promote counterfeit goods.  So, brand owners can – and should – continue to enforce their IP rights on Google search ads.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Google Updates to U.S. Trademark Policy

Updates to AdWords Trademark Policy

68 Regions Google Will Investigate the Use of Trademarks in Ad Text, in Keywords, or Both

192 Regions Google Will Investigate the Use of Trademarks in Ad Text (but Not in Keywords)

Category: Brand Abuse, Counterfeit, Gray Market, Trademarks | No Comments »

Tags: Advertising, Paid Search, Sponsored Links, Trademark Policy

Happy World Anti Counterfeiting Day!

The prevailing attitude among most consumers is that there is nothing wrong with buying fakes. The goal of a coordinated, global public service ad campaign launching tomorrow is out to change all that.

To coincide with “World Anti Counterfeiting Day” (which is June 11^th 2009  for those who may not be in the know), several anti-counterfeiting groups from around the world along with local governments and agencies are running public service ad campaigns to educate consumers about the negative impact counterfeiting has on the global economy and on society as a whole.  The aim is to build awareness around how counterfeiting fuels an underground economy that supports child labor, organized crime and terrorist activities while stifling job creation, innovation and tax revenues.  Counterfeit products are also known to pose serious public safety threats, particularly when it comes to fake drugs, automotive and aviation parts, and electrical equipment.

The International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition (IACC), or which MarkMonitor is a member, is teaming with the Global Anti-Counterfeiting Group, other anti-counterfeiting groups and local governments in running simultaneous public service campaigns tomorrow in NYC and Los Angeles in the U.S. as well as in France, Mexico and Canada.  The NYC campaign, for example, will include the streaming of anti-counterfeiting messages in Times Square at the Reuters Digital Billboard and NASDAQ with the goal of reaching millions of visitors and tourists.

We commend the IACC and other organizations for not only tackling the global counterfeiting problem from the legal and regulatory side, but also for taking steps to reduce the demand for fakes.  For as long as there is demand for too-good-to-be-true deals, there will be a supply.

Category: Brand Abuse, Counterfeit | No Comments »

Tags: counterfeits, IACC

A Seemingly Overwhelming Number of Important Documents Released by ICANN

Over the weekend, ICANN released a number of important documents including:  

Please find below brief synopses of these newly released documents.

Amended Guidebook Sections and Explanatory Memoranda

According to ICANN, many changes to the Draft Applicant Guidebook have been made as a result of the comments received to date. While revisions include amendments to the handling of geographical names, evaluation questions, comparative evaluation scoring, dispute resolution procedures and other registry agreement provisions, the requirement for Thick Whois appears to be the most notable. The public comment period for the guidebook excerpts will last from May 31, 2009 – July 20, 2009. The comments received together with the outcomes of the discussions relating to the overarching issues will constitute the basis for the third version of the guidebook that will be published at the end of the third quarter 2009.  

Analysis of Public Comment to Applicant Guidebook version 2

In response to the more than 200 comments received covering the second version of the Applicant Guidebook for new generic top-level domains, ICANN has published a comprehensive report. The report provides an analysis of the comments received and is broken into the following sections: General Concerns, Trademark Protections, TLD Demand and Economic Analysis, Potential for Malicious Conduct, Root Zone Scaling, Evaluation, Financial Considerations, Objection Process, Registry Agreement, String Contention, IDN and Respondents. 

Final Report on Trademark Protections in New gTLDs

The Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT) posted its final report which identified the following proposed solutions: IP Clearinghouse, Globally Protected Marks List and associated Rights Protection Mechanisms, and standardized pre-launch rights protection mechanisms; Uniform Rapid Suspension System; Post delegation dispute resolution mechanisms; Whois requirements for new TLDs; and Use of algorithm in string confusion review during initial evaluation. A public comment period covering the final report will last from May 29, 2009 to June 29, 2009. 

Draft Implementation Plan for the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process

ICANN has released a revised Draft Implementation Plan for the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process in an effort to elicit further community feedback both during and after the ICANN meeting in Sydney, Australia. A public comment period will last from May 31, 2009 to July 15, 2009. Comments received will be used to revise this implementation plan in preparation of a final version prior to ICANN’s meeting in Seoul, 26-30 October 2009.

New Registrar Contract

The new Registrar Contract consists of 17 amendments to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA). The amendments significantly increase the protections in place for domain registrants and the changes include: enhanced enforcement tools to assure full compliance with the ICANN contract and policies, expanded requirements for reseller agreements, additional audit and data escrow requirements, more explicit requirements for providing contact information, and new notice requirements and termination provisions. All new registrars will be required to sign the new agreement, as will any existing registrars that renew their accreditation.  

Root Server System Root Scaling Study

A study to determine the potential impact on the operation of the root server system of adding IPv6 address records, IDN top level names, other new TLDs, and new records to support DNS security to the root zone has been commissioned and will be completed by the end of August 2009.

The goal of the study is to construct a model of the root server system (including all of its provisioning and query components) that shows how the different parts are related, and how changing something in one part affects each of the other parts. A public comment period covering this study will last from May 28, 2009 to July 31, 2009.

Category: Domains, ICANN, Uncategorized, gTLDs | No Comments »

IRT to Release Final Report on Friday, May 29

The IRT (Implementation and Recommendation Team), which was formed by ICANN’s Intellectual Property Constituency, has identified a number of proposed solutions to address trademark protection issues and their final report will be published on May 29^th.

Their proposed solutions in the last draft included:

• IP Clearinghouse, Globally Protected Marks List and other top and second rights protection mechanisms;
• Draft Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS) Procedure;
• Post delegation dispute resolution mechanisms at the top level;
• Thick Whois model requirements for new TLDs; and
• Use of algorithm in string confusion review during initial evaluation.

The third version of the Applicant Guidebook will be made available after the ICANN Meeting in Sydney, so that additional discussions from the event and around the IRT recommendations can be incorporated into it. The third version is expected to be completed by September of this year. 

According to ICANN, it is currently anticipated that applications for new top-level domains will be accepted starting in the first quarter of 2010.

Category: Domains, ICANN, Trademarks, gTLDs | No Comments »

Expanding Internet Access Driving Software Piracy, Study Says

• Even though global software piracy increased overall in 2008, the piracy rate actually dropped in 52% of the 110 countries studied and stayed the same in 35% of them
• The impact of the global economic recession on software piracy is so far mixed, as reduced buying power is just one of many factors affecting piracy
• Sites offering access to pirated software also spread malware.  According to a 2006 IDC study, 29% of websites and 61% of P2P sites offering pirated software attempt to distribute malware.
• While the US has the lowest piracy rate in the world – 20% – it suffered the largest revenue loss in 2008 due to piracy given its leadership position in the global software industry

Brand owners are not standing by idle, however.  There have been a number of recent lawsuits against popular BitTorrent sites used to disseminate software, movies and music; just last month, the owners of the world’s most high-profile file sharing site – the Pirate Bay – were found guilty of copyright infringement and sentenced to one year in jail and fined $4.5 million.  Brand owners in conjunction with the Department of Justice have also been successful in obtaining 34 convictions involving the selling of pirated software on auction sites.  The BSA itself has been active in sending more than 1.9 million takedown notices in 2007 to Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to remove illegal software and has successfully shutdown thousands of illegal online auction listings.  

So, what can other brand owners from software and other industries learn from this?  Keep fighting the fight.  While piracy increased overall and in emerging countries, piracy actually went down in 57 countries and didn’t get worse in 39 countries.  This is due to the proactive brand protection efforts – both online and off – of leading global corporations.  By actively enforcing their rights online and implementing proven strategies involving consumer education, customer and channel programs, technology advances, and government partnerships, brand owners can reverse the tide in the illegal distribution of their brands.

Category: Piracy | No Comments »

Questions about ICANN by the NTIA

The recent news from the primordial alphabet soup that is the United States government and ICANN is that the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) just issued a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) seeking comments about the Joint Project Agreement (JPA) with ICANN and its scheduled expiration in September 2009. Comments must be submitted by June 8, 2009.

By way of explanation, ICANN works under loose NTIA supervision based on a ten-year-old-plus agreement called the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that transferred the technical management of the Domain Name System to ICANN. ICANN operated under that agreement until 2006 when it was extended via the JPA.

 At that time there was a midterm review of the JPA that identified that ICANN needed to make progress on “long-term stability, accountability, responsiveness, continued private sector leadership, stakeholder participation, increased contract compliance, and enhanced competition.” MarkMonitor submitted comments during that period on behalf of our customers.

In the face of the impending expiration of the JPA the NTIA asks some of the following Hamlet-like questions about ICANN in their NOI:

1. Is ICANN operating under the right principals, and, if so, has it integrated those principals?
2. Did privatization lead to good policy and is the model still appropriate given the goal of security and stability of the DNS? If not, is there a more appropriate model?
3. Has ICANN accomplished the tasks and hit the milestones set forth in the JPA and amendments to it?
4. Should ICANN be independent? If so, what are the steps to making it such?

The full text of the NTIA NOI can be found at : http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-9409.htm

Updated to fix formatting error on May 15, 2009 at 3:50pm.

Category: ICANN | No Comments »

Tags: icann

A Great Combination: Vigilance and Education

Most major brands suffer some type of online attacks but few use those attacks as opportunities to educate their customers.

This week, our customer Facebook experienced a high-profile phishing attack. Coincidentally, the attack just barely preceded our announcement that Facebook was expanding their relationship with MarkMonitor.

Facebook made the proverbial lemonade from this lemon by being prepared and acting immediately to reduce the risk faced by their community.  In addition to smart technical countermeasures on the Facebook site, the Facebook team made sure that their users were educated and aware, and the company spoke freely about the attack and those countermeasures.

MarkMonitor helped to neutralize the attack by broadcasting the attacking site’s URL to all major browser and security software vendors within minutes of verifying it.  This ‘fraudcasting’ action protected hundreds of millions of people with recent versions of Firefox and Internet Explorer from accidentally visiting the phishing attack site.  Shortly thereafter, our Security Operations Center got the phish site shut down, ending the attack and any possibility of users losing their credentials.

MarkMonitor extends kudos to Facebook for being so transparent on this issue and doing their part to make the Internet community safer.

Category: Phishing, Security | 1 Comment »

Tags: Phishing, Security

Study Reveals Relationship Between Consumer Trust and Credit Card Use

Javelin Strategy and Research recently released a study entitled “The Importance of Consumer Trust on FI Profitability” which attempts to measure the relationship between consumer confidence and credit card spending. 

The study, conducted in 2008 using a random sample of 2,339 online respondents representative of gender, age, and income levels of US online shoppers, asked a series of questions designed to ascertain the level of trust these consumers have in their financial institutions and how that relates to their spending levels. 

One of the key findings is that of the consumers who feel more trust in financial services companies, 19% indicated increased credit card spending over a 90 day period (26% decreased credit card spending). On the other hand, of those who feel less trust in financial services companies, only 9% increased credit card usage (and 50% decreased credit card usage).

It’s not particularly surprising that those who trust their financial institutions are more likely to use them. Can you think of a single relationship in your own life, personal or professional, which isn’t built on trust? Especially in times like this, when fraud is on the rise, trusting the wrong entity could have grave consequences. It’s also important to note that the study took place in September 2008 as the financial crisis was in its early stages.

The general weakness of today’s economy coupled with widespread fraud and uncertainty must certainly affect consumer spending and saving habits.  Only those financial institutions that can build and maintain consumer trust through continued transparent and ethical business practices coupled with strong brand protection strategies will continue to flourish in times like this.

Category: Phishing, Security | No Comments »

Tags: Consumer trust, Fraud, Phishing