As noted, the ICA did file an amicus brief in this matter on very short notice, and was the only party before the court raising matters relating to broad DNS legal and policy matters. That brief noted the long-standing and continuing federal involvement in the domain name system and the likelihood that Kentucky’s action was in violation of the Commerce Clause as well as basic principles of due process and jurisdiction. The arguments made in that brief attracted the attention of the Center for Democracy and Technology and we spoke to them about this matter at length; CDT subsequently filed its own brief asking for dismissal of the case, and was joined in that action by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union.

ICA is taking the lead in exploring the introduction of preemptive federal legislation in the next Congress that would prevent repetition of Kentucky’s abuse in other states by establishing preemptive federal standards for jurisdiction and due process that would have to be met for a court or administrative order for seizure of a domain name to be enforceable. We have already had conversations regarding this concept with registries, registrars, trade associations and corporations, and public interest groups involved with Internet law and policy. Efforts to draft such a proposal will occur over the next few months, with an eye toward seeking bipartisan introduction early in 2009. Based on our discussions we would expect such a proposal to receive wide support.

Every year we expect ICANN to do the right thing and uphold lease holders rights to their leases.

ICANN is not necessarily some global legal body as many expect them to be for whatever reason. Not to mention your so-called legal rights are defined by your registrar’s contract and whatever applicable laws in your area, and they both don’t want to deal with a gazillion legal issues from a gazillion legal jurisdictions.

Then again, people dispute other people’s rights every other day. ICANN really can’t do anything about others doing that, especially if those others file suit in whatever court of competent jurisdiction under whatever applicable law there is.

ICANN was not named as a party to this suit.

Moreover they have no horse in this this race, pun intended, so they have nothing to say about this.

It is up as you can see, to individual domain holders to protect their interest if their domain was seized and up to the rest of us to support our trade group the ICA.

iMEGA is a trade group for the gambling industry.

They are leading the charge.

What is the difference between iMEGA and the ICA.

Look at their revenue and budgets and you’ll see.

The gambling sites support their trade group so they have the money to fight.

Good lesson for all domainers here.

You want action and protection, you have to pay for it

We all collectively can do something to hold ICANNs
feet to the fire. We personally all need to organize some sort of resistance organization or co-op to address ICANNs blatant ignoring of what is their fiduciary responsibility to protect lease holders rights.

If we all continue to look the other way on this matter we are in certain danger of losing our leases. Anyone have any ideas ??

If Kentucky (or at least the Gov) wants this kind of control, let him launch his own Internet; or own tld.

Then he/they can make all the rules they want.

Otherwise…get out of the way.