<b><i>Online Extra:</b></i> Battle Over .SUCKS Domain Gets Testy

The registry that owns the controversial domain name “.sucks” has put the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on notice that its criticisms and actions against the company could lead to legal action.

In a letter sent to ICANN's general counsel, Vox Populi Registry accused the organization responsible for overseeing Internet domain names of making false allegations and defamatory statements about the company and its business practices. In the letter, written by well-known intellectual property lawyer and Fish & Richardson partner David Hosp, Vox Populi demanded ICANN cease such activity immediately.

“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,” Hosp wrote.

The letter was not the only criticism of ICANN to become public. In May, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet held a hearing on the “.sucks” domain that also addressed concerns about the U.S. giving up its oversight of ICANN and the Internet. Lawmakers fear that the process could fall under the control of foreign governments, and the latest controversy over TLDs adds to the impression that ICANN should not take over. “The hearing ended up being a kind of indictment of ICANN,” said Joanne Ludovici, a partner at McDermott Will & Emery specializing in trademark law.

The letter from Vox Populi is another development in the controversy surrounding the “.sucks” generic top level domain (gTLD), which was established as a consumer advocacy tool to be used by those who want to complain or air grievances online. Brand owners, already unhappy that their brand or company could be besmirched with “yourbrand.sucks” websites, were outraged on learning they could be forced to pay as much as $2,499 a year for a pre-emptive purchase of the domain, far more than the typical price for registering a TLD.

Brand owners have called the pricing structure “predatory,” describing it as a form of extortion. As the outrage in the trademark community grew, ICANN, which had approved the “.sucks” domain, asked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Canada's Office of Consumer Affairs to investigate whether Vox Populi's pricing practices are “predatory, exploitative and coercive.”

But in its letter to ICANN general counsel John Jeffrey, Vox Populi spelled out why ICANN has no grounds to object to the registry's actions. Hosp also chastised ICANN for sending the FTC and Office of Consumer Affairs letters that “endorses” the brand owners' allegations that Vox Populi engaged in “illicit” and “illegal activity.” And he turned the tables on ICANN, suggesting that in doing so the organization failed to meet its contractual obligations and has taken action to harm Vox Populi's ability to operate within the agreement.

“Your letter identifies no law that has been broken, no regulation that has been transgressed and no contractual provision that has been breached,” Hosp wrote.

Meanwhile, Vox Populi was harshly criticized in the House subcommittee hearing, where Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) described the “.sucks” pricing model as “legalized extortion,” and Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), called it a “shakedown.”

But ICANN also was targeted for its actions. In the “.sucks” matter, ICANN's failure to police the matter itself “demonstrates the absurdity and futility of ICANN's own enforcement processes,” Goodlatte said.

Lisa Shuchman is a Reporter for Corporate Counsel, an ALM sibling of Internet Law & Strategy.

The registry that owns the controversial domain name “.sucks” has put the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on notice that its criticisms and actions against the company could lead to legal action.

In a letter sent to ICANN's general counsel, Vox Populi Registry accused the organization responsible for overseeing Internet domain names of making false allegations and defamatory statements about the company and its business practices. In the letter, written by well-known intellectual property lawyer and Fish & Richardson partner David Hosp, Vox Populi demanded ICANN cease such activity immediately.

“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,” Hosp wrote.

The letter was not the only criticism of ICANN to become public. In May, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet held a hearing on the “.sucks” domain that also addressed concerns about the U.S. giving up its oversight of ICANN and the Internet. Lawmakers fear that the process could fall under the control of foreign governments, and the latest controversy over TLDs adds to the impression that ICANN should not take over. “The hearing ended up being a kind of indictment of ICANN,” said Joanne Ludovici, a partner at McDermott Will & Emery specializing in trademark law.

The letter from Vox Populi is another development in the controversy surrounding the “.sucks” generic top level domain (gTLD), which was established as a consumer advocacy tool to be used by those who want to complain or air grievances online. Brand owners, already unhappy that their brand or company could be besmirched with “yourbrand.sucks” websites, were outraged on learning they could be forced to pay as much as $2,499 a year for a pre-emptive purchase of the domain, far more than the typical price for registering a TLD.

Brand owners have called the pricing structure “predatory,” describing it as a form of extortion. As the outrage in the trademark community grew, ICANN, which had approved the “.sucks” domain, asked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Canada's Office of Consumer Affairs to investigate whether Vox Populi's pricing practices are “predatory, exploitative and coercive.”

But in its letter to ICANN general counsel John Jeffrey, Vox Populi spelled out why ICANN has no grounds to object to the registry's actions. Hosp also chastised ICANN for sending the FTC and Office of Consumer Affairs letters that “endorses” the brand owners' allegations that Vox Populi engaged in “illicit” and “illegal activity.” And he turned the tables on ICANN, suggesting that in doing so the organization failed to meet its contractual obligations and has taken action to harm Vox Populi's ability to operate within the agreement.

“Your letter identifies no law that has been broken, no regulation that has been transgressed and no contractual provision that has been breached,” Hosp wrote.

Meanwhile, Vox Populi was harshly criticized in the House subcommittee hearing, where Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) described the “.sucks” pricing model as “legalized extortion,” and Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), called it a “shakedown.”

But ICANN also was targeted for its actions. In the “.sucks” matter, ICANN's failure to police the matter itself “demonstrates the absurdity and futility of ICANN's own enforcement processes,” Goodlatte said.

Lisa Shuchman is a Reporter for Corporate Counsel, an ALM sibling of Internet Law & Strategy.