As you have read, Rick Schwartz resigned as board member of the ICA.
Rick was not only a founding member of the board, but one of the first to actively promote the ICA to the domainer community.
From my perceptive Rick grew frustrated with the lack of response from the ICA to issues that concern domainers.
Over the past months since the Snowe bill, Rick and I have approached the ICA on several issues of import to domainers.
Tucows reclaiming domains it had auctioned off, after the auction ended.
Registrars cherry picking expired domains of their customers for their own benefit.
Google-Yahoo proposed deal.
Auction platforms allowing the sale of clearly trademark infringing domains.
Taking a proactive approach to head off the next Snowe bill.
These are some of the issues Rick and I brought to the ICA on behalf of all domainers.
All of these issue met with resistance and concluded with inaction.
If you look at the composition of the Board, and those, while not on the board, who have the ear of the ICA, you will find as of yesterday 4 domainers. Myself, Frank, Ron Jackson, and Rick.
Now Rick is gone.
Aside from the three remaining domainers in the loop, the rest are parking companies, auction platforms, a registrar and attorneys
Sometimes, like with the Snowe bill, all those varied interest can come together and agree on a path.
Unfortunately in more day to day operations, domainers, parking companies, registrars and the attorneys who represent them have conflicting interests.
Rick believed that the ICA should represent domainers first and foremost.
SInce you pretty much have to buy your way into the inner circle by contributing a certain amount of money to the ICA, (or being an attorney in the industry) it leaves most of the general membership, almost all domainers, without an adequate voice in the inner circle.
This is where the frustration comes in.
Five years ago I knew Rick just like most of you do.
The reputation, the legend, the domain king.
The guy who took owning domain names and turned it into an industry.
Over the last few years I have gotten to know Rick very well.
I find myself “thinking” the way he does on so many issues.
I understand where he is coming from.
I find myself coming from the same place
He stands up for domainers.
Because he is one.
His agenda is your agenda.
When I asked Rick to comment on why he resigned from the board he told me:
“””””When I was a vocal critic inside at the table it went nowhere. Being outside and a vocal critic will be much harder for them to ignore. There will be pressure applied not just by me but by others that might share my take on things.
A man who never quits is never defeated. I have not quit, I have taken on a new role and I hope that it leads to better representation of the rank and file domainer.””””
So where does the ICA go now?
My feeling is that if the membership base of the ICA is 90% domainers, those 90% must have much better representation on the board than they do now. The board needs to be restructured to allow the voice of the many, smaller domainer contributors to be heard as loudly as the bigger non-domainer contributors.
As for my future involvement of the ICA I am waiting until New York to speak with Michael and Phil in person and eye to eye.
In the meantime I would love to hear from domainers who are members of the ICA of their thoughts about the ICA and the direction that you want it to take.
Damir says
Great post and you are making a GREAT point there
Jeremy says
Good for you Rick!
How about a “domainer’s guild” or such?
WQ says
Except for taking on the Snowe Bill, I haven’t seen the ICA do much else positive for me as a domainer.
Im just glad I didnt give them the 10k to join when everyone was bashing me for not joining.
david says
Speaking from a really newbie point of view (not having much background in what’s been going on in domain-land for the last 15 years or so…), I think it’s great that there are some experienced players in the field who are sticking to their conscience. Way to go! Lagging, but behind you all the way.
Steve says
Go Rick!! Setup everything offshore.
parking programs,
servers,
banking, payment systems.
get control of the net moved outside of “fortress america”
– call out trademark squatters, not to pick on anyone but the whole .cm mess doesn’t do anything for making our business look legit. scooping traffic that’s not your’s makes rightful owners mad and the rest of the industry looking like crooks. 🙂
– registrar’s scooping domains and making it difficult to transfer the ones you have.
etc….
I will wait for the Rick’s new organization. maybe of domainers pooling there domains together for better ad rates, development deals etc.
premium generic domains in any language are the future. .com will rule but idn values will explode.
idn.idn the new .com.
🙂 peace
Steve Morales says
WQ-This is the reason the ICA has not evolved into an organization for domainers. 97% of domainers failed to support it. Those that are not part of the solution, are part of the problem. It is easy to point the finger at an organization that is struggling, but hard to point the finger at one self and ask what have I done to help it grow in the right direction.
The ICA is going through some rough growing pains. Funding is essential for growth. They must represent those who are funding the organization in order to keep the funding. This happens in almost any organization that wants to continue doing business.
Nothing new to the corporate world. Domainers have failed, not the ICA. I have seen so many domainers give excuses about becoming members and supporting the ICA throughout this past year.
The main statement made was “I will wait and see how the organization grows”. How possiblly can the ICA grow to support domainers and their concerns if the domainers are not supporting the ICA.
Domainers are at fault. The intent of ICA is a sound game plan, and they will be there for the domainer, if the domainer is there for them. Does this make sense?
The NRA is only powerful because of the members who support it. Not because of the Board of Directors. The supporters give the issues for the BOD to address in many instances to congress.
Domainers have failed. No one individual can do it alone, even if they are Rick Schwartz.
It is good that Rick S. left due to negative public opinion of his agenda as co-founder. Perhaps this will change membership enrollment, but chances are it will not. Nothing against Rick S. with this statement.
This does not mean that ICA will not evolve into the organization that the industry is in dire need of to represent domainers and their assets.
A reform at ICA is definitely in order and I believe they should change up their criteria to become a board member to embrace domainers.
I have expressed my concerns about membership fees during a conference call as I volunteered to head up the ICA Funding and Marketing work group along with members Elliot Silver, Nat Cohen, and Sedo Marketing Director(Sorry for forgetting your name). I became demotivated from running this group when I saw the lack of support and membership from domainers. I think all of us felt this way.
We have all supported the ICA financially and with blog posts publicly and it didn’t even cause a dent in membership. There are many others who also showed support publicly.
Domainers just do not get it. It is truly an industry of “ONE” and change needs to occur.
Whether a small guy or big fish in this industry, if you have not supported the ICA financially or by volunteering, you are to be held somewhat responsible for ICA deviating from its initial game plan.
No individual or small group of domainers or ICA will be able to do it alone. This is an industry. Take pride in it, embrace it, promote it, unite it, and join the organization that will help established standards and codes of conducts for those who do business in the domain industry. Most importantly, the ICA will protect domainers assets if domainers support this non-profit organization.
Domainers need to change their thought process. Good times do not last forever. I have said this many times, and PPC returns are proving this. If we do not collectively unite and make our voice heard to congress and corporate america, the outcome will be devistating.
The ICA has a solid foundation and good leadership, but they can not self sustain the organization and represent domainers for free.
Get off your wallets make change.
Join the ICA, donate, volunteer, and provide your domainer concerns. Complain publicly when the organization you support does not deliver the results you demand.
But do not complain about the ICA if do not support it.
Time to stop being a part of the problem and start being a part of the solution.
Recommend you reading Michael Mann’s book “Make Millions and Make Change” to get a perspective on how you can help nonprofits and gain from this.
Thanks.
Steve
Stelladora says
Back when dinosaurs crawled the earth, the only forum was the GreatDomains blog. Then Rick started speaking out in other venues about how domain investors should start thinking of themselves as professionals.
He sparked a sense of professionalism that continues to grow as the industry grows.
For little people, the ICA can and should create new opportunities for involvement. This can include a basic membership fee of as little $10-$20, but with full voting rights on policy decisions. Expanding the membership base will add weight to ICA’s lobbying efforts.
The marketplaces and escrow services should allow sellers the option to contribute a percentage of sales to the ICA or to a future professional investor’s organization. It could be half a percent up to a sale price of ten thousand dollars and a quarter of one percent for sales above that threshold.
Whether a seller contributes should be shown in their membership profile in the marketplaces. Then buyers like me could choose to only buy from people who contribute.
Marketplaces and vendors could offer discounts to people who contribute to the ICA or a future professional investor’s organization. Offering discounts is a great way to attract new customers, even if the discounts only amount to 10%.
The next step would be for members of the ICA to pledge to only engage in professional conduct.
Hopefully, such a pledge would not bar members from drinking and registering or drinking and bidding.
MHB says
WQ
Let’s not use this as an opportunity for excusing people from not joining.
Clearly this is not Rick’s intent.
What we need are more domainers giving more money and getting a controlling interest in the way the organization works and what interests it represents.
MHB says
David
As you get older and successful in your endeavors, one of the benefits is you get to speak your mind and follow your conscience.
MHB says
Steve
I have no idea of what the hell your talking about.
MHB says
Steve Morales
Thanks for your post
“”””It is easy to point the finger at an organization that is struggling, but hard to point the finger at one self and ask what have I done to help it grow in the right direction””””
I don’t know if you were directing this comment to myself or Rick or just in general, however for myself I contributed $25K, then an additonal $10K once the Snowe bill came out, as part of a matching program which raised another 40K.
Rick’s record in financially supporting the ICA needs no further documentation.
You said
“””The intent of ICA is a sound game plan, and they will be there for the domainer, if the domainer is there for them. Does this make sense?””””
It makes sense, but may not be true.
I have been asking the ICA for the last 6 months to support domainers in issues that effect them and the ICA has consistently refused in deference to its “big” supporters, parking companies, registrars and auction houses.
You said
“”If we do not collectively unite and make our voice heard to congress and corporate america, the outcome will be devistating. “””
Steve, its my opinion that the trademark problem has to get solved or at least curtailed. I have urged the ICA to adopt some rules and put pressure on parking companies, registrars and auction houses.
I do not think we can expect to just hold off trademark holders complaining about the abuse to congress, without alleviating the abuse inside the industry.
The ICA needs to give domainers at least equal control over the ICA policies.
Steve Morales says
MHB,
Was not taking a stab at you or Rick. I meant this generally. I know both of you support the ICA 100% and have contributed a great deal. Rick has changed his support obviously, but did so much to get it started.
I agree with all of your points. The trademark abuse as you described should be a priority issue to handle for the ICA.
There is no excuse for such ethics to exist in this industry by the big registrars and parking companies.
Keep up the Great work Michael. I enjoy reading your blog.
Steve
WQ says
>>WQ-This is the reason the ICA has not evolved into an organization for domainers. 97% of domainers failed to support it.<<
Steve,
The reason why domainers didnt join was because ICA never really did anything positive until they started taking on the Snowe Bill.
Many hadnt even heard much of the ICA before this. I know I didnt.
Then a handful of domainers started yelling at everyone to donate to the ICA and acting as if they knew something about it.
A few months later we are finding out that the ICA aint all that.
jblack says
Mike,
The issues you mentioned are tangentially related to the ICA’s charter as a Washington lobby, they are not core legislative related issues. Sure, the Snowe Bill follow on yes, and perhaps remotely the potential Yahoo-Google, but some actually believe that relationship may be good for parking so there is some debate on that.
It generally seems many believe the ICA is all things to all domain issues. It’s not. It has a specific purpose. The ICA has to pick its battles, not pick all of them; many are not even part of its charter or expertise. The ICA is not some kind of “domainer fix it shop” or complaint department, it has limited resources and limited staff and needs to be focused on the target at hand, and that target is legislation and ICANN related issues. Strategic, core issues, not the whine of the day gripes.
Besides your other issues, how about asking the ICA to police and punish domain registrants who blatantly infringe on trademarks? Nice idea, but that too, unfortunately, would rightly fall into the “too hard to do” category for the ICA.
The question still remains though, why Rick is just resigning but is also saying he does not recommend people support it. That part requires an explanation.
PS. I disagree with you that “the ICA needs to give domainers at least equal control over the ICA policies.” That is part of the problem, “domainers” in too many cases are not legitimate businesses. Handing “domainers” who spent 6 dollars on a name and use privacy to hide their identity while executing trademark infringement, while residing overseas is NOT the people anyone should want to influence a US lobby organization.
Donny M says
Well I am thinking you need numbers when you have 100 people with 5 donating 90 percent of funding it does work in long term
. Start over with a new name or organization and new platform. Get Rick back on and go with a $9.95 plan per month with domainers. Work on getting 1,000 to 2,000 subscribers, must think like itunes, netflix etc. The most important things are numbers.
Call the site something like ProtectMyDomainnames.com Have a few articles written per month just for subscribers, etc could go on about this but its just an idea.
Mamnoon says
In a new or revised organization, the marketplaces, registrars, appraisers, brokers and other vendors could, on the surface, have the appearance of being secondary to professional registrants. The marketplaces would serve a role in removing or modifying listings from certified-association-members who did not meet some pre-set criteria.
Afternic already has such a screening process in action, but it also includes delisting domains in categories other than obvious trademark violations, such as adult and violent-oriented domains.
Certified association membership would probably have to be specific to the marketplaces that participated in the association, because registrants with a banned name would not immediately delete it.
To account for different standards at different marketplaces etc., those organizations could be allowed to say that they meet or exceed the association’s standards.
MHB says
Mr. Black
“”””The question still remains though, why Rick is just resigning but is also saying he does not recommend people support it. That part requires an explanation.””””
I think the explanation is simple he wouldn’t ask you to support something he did not support.
Did you read Rick’s post on his blog? There the reasons are laid out why he can’t support the ICA anymore
Steve says
“MHB // Sep 9, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Steve
I have no idea of what the hell your talking about.”
MHB,
Every time you miss-type .com with .cm traffic is forwarded to a company that did a deal with the country of Camroon. This site makes money off of redirecting everything including trademarked names!!!!! I think that’s a problem. Brilliant idea, but it’s still a problem for individuals trying to develop legitimate domains.
No one really say’s anything about this practice. I mean it’s a great way to exploit lost traffic but it leaves a bad reflection on the industry. I don’t think i ever heard ica address this huge problem.
Cheers,
Steve
Steve says
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2007/06/01/100050989/
MHB says
Steve
Ok I understand.
I agree with you, as it relates to trademark name.
Google.cm tremendous problem, computers.cm, not a problem
As far as I know the ICA has not issued any opinion on it,
However the guy who, lets say delicately, may have started the problem, is on the ICA board.
Steve says
🙂 as I said it was a brilliant idea! it just makes trademark owners mad as hell and gives the rest of us generic domain owners a bad rep.
i mentioned the offshore stuff just because not much of anyone’s individual rights or property are very safe in the US any more. If the current US admin wants to tweak internet rules to suit them or their supporters they do and will. Based on the last 8 years Americans aren’t getting any more rights, they are losing them. I just thought some proactive domain management strategies ie. moving domains and domain registration systems(verisign) outside of this country would be a good idea.
Cheers, thanks for the great resource.
Steve
GFY says
Michael if Rick is not supporting the ICA why the fuck would any smaller domainer ?
Secondly this clown says PS. I disagree with you that “the ICA needs to give domainers at least equal control over the ICA policies.” That is part of the problem, “domainers” in too many cases are not legitimate businesses. Handing “domainers” who spent 6 dollars on a name and use privacy to hide their identity while executing trademark infringement, while residing overseas is NOT the people anyone should want to influence a US lobby organization.
Then stop asking those non legitimate people to support your sham of an organization, that looks out for a certain few.
Bottom line domainers do not support the ICA because they do not believe in the ICA, if you do great support them, but most don’t and won’t and bottom line ICA lost all credibility with SCHWARTZ saying DO NOT SUPPORT THE ICA. GAME OVER and if the shills on this board do not like it then that is tough.
Please the scare tactics that some tried for the SNOWE BILL was a joke, guess what the majority of domainers do not own domains valuable enough to worry over the SNOWE BILL,
Let’s look who does not belong to the ICA GODADDY world’s largerst registrar, now Rick , AGAIN the ICA is not relevant to most.
Yaron Viner says
I am so proud of Rick. Some people talk the talk, and some walk the walk.
I asked it on this forum many times before:
Why should any domainer join an organization with Tucows Inc. – Professional I Members ???
and about the .cm issue – the question is not if this is a great idea or not. the question is what does this deal means for the people of Cameroon?
IPN says
Efforts to discredit one or more ICA platinum sponsors are nonsense. It’s just talk by people who are jealous of success.
I don’t believe the talk about domain swiping by employees of one of ICA’s platinum sponsors. Nor could another ICA platinum sponsor have provided direct or indirect financial consideration to individuals related to government officials in Cameroon. Nope, wouldn’t be right.
To believe such nonsense could lead to the impression that participation in the ICA might help improve one’s image in the face of questionable activities that never happened anyway.
Stephen Douglas says
All the posters here have relevant complaints and viewpoints. However, regardless of how you feel about Rick, he BLEW it by posting his resignation by attacking the organization publicly. He threw the baby out with the bathwater.
If Rick and any other board members had problems, these are issues that should have been discussed between members, and calmly represented on the domain forums. The ICA is how old? 18 months? I never heard ONE COMPLAINT from Rick or anyone else about the reasons why he’s “frustrated”. As a Professional member, I pay $1000 a year to support the ICA. That’s not a lot to me, but it could be to a lot of other domainers. Rick just erased my membership value with his classless resignation.
It’s sooooo easy to quit, especially when you have reached the success you want and your comments can broadcast that success and power to separate yourself from those trying to repeat your success.
It’s very easy to get frustrated when you’re bored and tired, and your bank account says “it’s all party time from here on out, my friend”. It’s a lot harder to stay the course, try different approaches, and sell the position you stand by.
Rick, God bless him, looked at his bank account, decided that his time trying to work the ICA into something that he envisioned it to be, was not worth it. Dang, it’s just so hard to think up solutions when you can book a three month first class vacation to anywhere in the world and not blink at the cost.
So where does that leave the hundred or so domainers and many more domain companies who paid to support the ICA?
Does the term “If you’re an officer, don’t sink the ship when you don’t like the destination” come to mind? We’re all on the ship, and one of the executive officers just rammed us into an iceberg.
To publicly denounce the ICA, without a serious effort to attempt to fix the issues that concerned you as a founder, is egotistical and hugely devastating to the domain industry. Rick’s voice is big, and when he takes the low road to use that big voice and denigrate an organization so many domainers have supported BECAUSE OF HIS ENDORSEMENT, that is truly thoughtless and questionable.
Rick will always have his blind supporters who just follow along without thinking of the impact of his decisions. You see them posting here. But like many a hero before him, Rick lost sight of the end game, got suckered in by his profits, and decided to devastate an organization trying very hard to find its direction.
It doesn’t matter now what the issues were that made Rick decide he could post his resignation without any nobility whatsoever, it’s now all about what domainers can do, and the ICA can do, to survive. Rick’s statements were like a mother spanking her baby to death because it didn’t know how to feed itself.
There are a lot of issues to be addressed about the ICA. Better pricing for domainer memberships (not every domainer is making $10,000 a month in PPC), and building a better website, focusing on important issues, hiring more employees to help run the organization, and better promotion to bring in new members.
However, never have I seen in my 30 years of business, a person who has made his fortune in an industry, created an organization to further the progress of the industry for the BETTERMENT OF ITS PARTICIPANTS, but suddenly, and egotistically, publicly bash the organization because he was “unhappy” with its direction. If his organization had no paying members, then bash away. But the ICA had lots of paying members.
Real players spend time and money FIXING problems, and going beyond the call to sacrifice their time and efforts in order to do what’s best for the organization they helped found. The truly weak person takes the money and runs.
For the record, a lot of the complaints in this thread are focused on issues the ICA can’t fix, and should be directed at ICANN, the real culprit.
Selfish successful “rich” people abound in our country. We call them Republicans. Rick, I thought I knew you.
Rob Sequin says
Stephen,
That is a pretty harsh assessment of Rick and I think you are going to find yourself in the minority of domainers with your comments.
If the ICA now fails because of one man then I say it must not be a very stable operation.
Sure Rick wields a lot of power with his position in the Industry, financial resources and words but he is not the President of the industry. (King, yes. President, no 🙂
I have only met Rick one time to be honest with you but I have read just about everything he has ever read for MANY years and I have always found him to be VERY positive and very motivational. Sure he did things to advance the industry which put money in his pocket but I never got the impression that Rick advanced the industry with propaganda in order to put money in his pocket.
So, if he has decided to make this move to try to make the ICA a better organization, then I support Rick. I don’t see how this can be called a selfish move by Rick.
However, I think it is a sad day for domaining. The saying “United we stand, divided we fall” comes to mind.
Domainers are maverick entrepreneurs by nature so it’s hard to round us up and unite us. Maybe we need more of a grassroots type organization from the ground up rather than a top level special interest group?
Anyway, I’ll be looking forward to more comments from Rick. Maybe Frank Shilling will make a long awaited blog post about the ICA and his current thoughts?
jblack says
Mike,
Yes, I read the post. And read it again. Its still lacking specificity as to why others should not support the ICA. Its one thing for him to “take his ball and go home”, its another thing entirely to tell other kids “do not play ball”. If there is a serious structural reason why he is now recommending others not support ICA (like fraud, etc) he needs to say it. Otherwise, it just comes across like he could not be the quarterback so the whole game appears flawed to him. Perhaps ICA leaders did not like adult content names and that pissed him off? Either way, if he’s not more specific, he’s not as credible with his recommendation as he could be.
And GFY, correct, illegitimate/trademark infringing “domainers” should stay away from ICA and refrain from donating. No one asked them for their “support”. Its not surprising some “domainers” do not like ICA if they are infringing on trademarks, that’s expected.
MyStore says
Excellent post…my support to Rick!!!
Jeremy says
jblack,
I understand your sentiment but he never asked anyone to not play ball. He says he can’t ASK them to play ball any longer. Big difference.
MHB says
Mr. Black
I certainly cannot speak for Rick, but I can tell you that the ICA has no problems with adult domains (i have plenty).
Here is my thoughts of where Rick is coming from:
The ICA does not represent domainers first.
They represent the bigger contributors, parking companies, auction platforms and registrars.
He is a domainer.
If there is an issue between a domainer and a parking company or a domainer or an auction house, the ICA is not going to support the domainer.
Therefore as a domainer Rick has chosen not to support the ICA.
If he doesn’t support it, he wouldn’t ask you to support it.
He has asked people to support the ICA in the past.
Now is just saying he can’t support them.
He is withdrawing the support he has given over the last couple of years.
He is not telling to you what to do
This is only my interpretation of his post. Like I said I do not speak for Rick.
MHB says
GFY
Your post is way off. The ICA does not want such “domainers” as a member. In fact these people are not domainers, they are just crooks and thieves.
Moreover such people would not be elected to the board to represent domainers.
The problem now is that the ICA has too few domainers as decision makers on the board and too many other interest.
When domainers and the other interests conflict, not surprisingly domainers lose
jblack says
Mike,
Got it. But here is my point: “If there is an issue between a domainer and a parking company or a domainer or an auction house, the ICA is not going to support the domainer.” So what is that issue exactly? Example? So we are now led to believe the ICA just supports the parking companies? Ok, if true, how is even that by itself “against” the domain name owner? Where is the SPECIFIC issue that highlights ANY siginficant difference? As Michael Collins already pointed out, these entities have mutual interests by nature of the industry anyway. If there are significant, opposing differences, what are they exactly? Without a clear answer on that, this appears to be more of power struggle than a substantive issue difference.
Again, its fine for him to say “I quit”, but its a totally different issue to say “Do not join”. I fail to see how the current ICA is COUNTER domain name owner interests without substantive explanation. This is a critical issue, because it may cause a lack of funding. Then again, some may have withheld support because of certain board members (like IREIT) in the past, so perhaps support might increase. Who knows.
MHB says
Mr. Black
Again I cannot speak for Rick, but some of the issues are in my post.
Should registrars be allowed to hold back expired domains of its customers and take ownership of them without letting them drop to domainers?
Tucows is a board member they say its OK with them. Too bad domainers.
Auction houses not honoring sales to domainers after the auction is over? Sorry domainers.
Listing trademark domains on our auction platform so that congress take action against all domains, sorry domainers.
You get the idea?
jblack says
Ok, Mike thanks. Agree on Tucows (did not know they were a board member, they are not listed on the ICA site as a board member), if they are a board member, they should be removed for actions counter to the code of conduct. Your second point is primarily related to your first with Tucows. Not sure what the ICA leverage point against external players is on the last issue you list.
GFY says
Mike you missed my point I was referencing the other guys post calling all domainers not legitimates businesses I am not talking about tm infringers I do not know any and I do not or ever owned a TM DOMAIN.
He made the reference so I used the word non legitimate, WHAT I AM SAYING IS I SPEAK TO A LOT OF DOMAINERS AND THEY HAVE NO BELIEF IN THE ICA. Now that Rick left that is just increased 10 fold