[ILUG] IEDR non-reaction to misleading domain registrations

[Martín Ferrari]

Hey all,

As the debate around the referendum on the 8th amendment heatens, some
actors are playing dirty.

The domains repeal8.ie, repeal8th.ie, and repealeighth.ie are
redirecting to a pro-life site thisismylife.ie, in a clear attempt to
mislead people.

It has been repeatedly reported to the IEDR, and they decided it was OK.
If somebody has contacts in there, or in related bodies, it would be
great to have some signal amplification, so this stops.

Thanks.
--
Martín Ferrari (Tincho)

[John McCormac]

Post by Martín Ferrari
Hey all,
It has been repeatedly reported to the IEDR, and they decided it was OK.
If somebody has contacts in there, or in related bodies, it would be
great to have some signal amplification, so this stops.
If the registrations are in accordance with IEDR regulations, then there's

nothing much to be done. Neither side has a monopoly on terms used for
domain names as there are no trademarks or intellectual property issues. It
seems that one side just registered domain names before the other side did.

Regards...jmcc

[bigbro]

This could be considered a 'bad faith' registration of a domain, and as
such may be revoked.
Also:
http://gdn.domains/039repeal-the-eighth039-websites-that-redirect-to-pro-life-pages-039do-not-break-any-rules039/

For a formal challenge, IEDR dispute resolution is outsourced to WIPO,
which appears to mean that any challenger must:
(a) demonstrate that THEY have a right to the domain and
(b) pay the €1,500 challenge fee and wait for 21 days for an outcome from
the WIPO panel.

Specifically (from https://www.iedr.ie/blog/how-to-appeal-a-ie-registration/
):

"In order to remain impartial, the IEDR uses an independent third-party
arbiter for disputes; the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO).
Anyone filing a complaint to WIPO must prove three things to them. Firstly
that they have a right to the disputed domain. Secondly that the current
registrant does not have any claim or legitimate interests in the domain.
And finally, why the domain should be considered as having been registered
or used in bad faith.

In order for a complaint to be considered valid, it must also comply with
these rules: http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/rules/ie.html "


In this circumstance, given there will be a referendum surrounding this,
and rules about balanced and fair provision of information, I wonder if the
IEDR would be willing to suspend the domains and hold them as
unregisterable - so neither side gets them. Both already have a single
registered .ie domain and website, with clear, unambiguous names.

This might be an interesting request both to the IEDR and the referendum
commission, except there doesn't appear to be a referendum commission
established for this issue yet.

Best regards,
-->Gar

Post by Martín Ferrari
Hey all,
It has been repeatedly reported to the IEDR, and they decided it was OK.
If somebody has contacts in there, or in related bodies, it would be
great to have some signal amplification, so this stops.
If the registrations are in accordance with IEDR regulations, then

there's nothing much to be done. Neither side has a monopoly on terms used
for domain names as there are no trademarks or intellectual property
issues. It seems that one side just registered domain names before the
other side did.
Regards...jmcc
--
Irish Linux Users Group
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ILUG" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/a/linux.ie/group/ilug/.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/a/
linux.ie/d/msgid/ilug/11e83904-7fc3-40cb-9c85-5136248c3da7%40linux.ie
<https://groups.google.com/a/linux.ie/d/msgid/ilug/11e83904-7fc3-40cb-9c85-5136248c3da7%40linux.ie?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.

--
Gareth 'bigbro' Eason

[John McCormac]

Post by bigbro
This could be considered a 'bad faith' registration of a domain, and as
such may be revoked.

Not sure that it is an example of bad faith registrations because both
sides seem to have no defensible claim on the terms.

With a WIPO dispute, it is necessary to prove that they have some rights
that have been infringed. These rights are generally based on trademarks.
(Unless they want to get into the quagmire of "passing off".) The whole
dispute resolution process has been hammered out over decades. Arguably,
this is a typical article from the Journal that's short on detail and high
on indignation. The grandiose full title for the pro-choice quote and the
abbreviated title for the pro-life quote is a classic example of unbalanced
journalism. (The link seems to be a lift from a Journal.ie article.) One
sounds very official and the other sounds randomish. The "formal complaint"
to IEDR threatened by the pro-choice crowd sounds very grand but ultimately
is just hot air. IEDR will just tell them to file for a dispute resolution
process. Unless backed up with a trademark or legal action, most registries
and registrars will respond with a politely worded PFO.

Suspending and revoking domain names that may offend somebody's
sensibilities is a very dangerous path because it would be used to suppress
freedom of speech. These registrations are political registrations for a
campaign and they generally have a short lifespan (a few years at best
before they are deleted). Neither side has a monopoly on the terms used.
Having IEDR and a referendum commission limit what can and cannot be
registered would not be a good thing and the referendum would be over by
the time anything would be decided. IEDR has already said that the
registrations are in accordance with the regulations so despite feelings
being hurt and the usual windbaggery, there's little to be done other than
initiating a dispute resolution process and making money for lawyers.

Regards...jmcc

[Chewy]

I had raised a complaint with IEDR previously. They seem to have outsourced the .ie domain management to Spiralhosting.com <http://spiralhosting.com/> and any quality that the .ie brand had seems to have been jettisoned. Mine was a complaint about esta.ie advertising a service for US visa waiver registration. It costs only $14 and they were charging and extra $74 on top of that. It comes near top of google hits for ETSA. That site was redirected to another .com site. That owning company was registered in Gibraltar, not even in the EU. They fluffed it off as a UK company - a UK registered company was in the middle of the multiple chain of registrations. But I do note that any reference to Gibraltar was removed from the redirected end site afterwards.

Death of a brand, I fear. Anyone can get a .ie these days it seems, a wide change from the hoops I used to have to jump through to get a .ie

Patrick

This could be considered a 'bad faith' registration of a domain, and as such may be revoked.
Not sure that it is an example of bad faith registrations because both sides seem to have no defensible claim on the terms.
With a WIPO dispute, it is necessary to prove that they have some rights that have been infringed. These rights are generally based on trademarks. (Unless they want to get into the quagmire of "passing off".) The whole dispute resolution process has been hammered out over decades. Arguably, this is a typical article from the Journal that's short on detail and high on indignation. The grandiose full title for the pro-choice quote and the abbreviated title for the pro-life quote is a classic example of unbalanced journalism. (The link seems to be a lift from a Journal.ie article.) One sounds very official and the other sounds randomish. The "formal complaint" to IEDR threatened by the pro-choice crowd sounds very grand but ultimately is just hot air. IEDR will just tell them to file for a dispute resolution process. Unless backed up with a trademark or legal action, most registries and registrars will respond with a politely worded PFO.
Suspending and revoking domain names that may offend somebody's sensibilities is a very dangerous path because it would be used to suppress freedom of speech. These registrations are political registrations for a campaign and they generally have a short lifespan (a few years at best before they are deleted). Neither side has a monopoly on the terms used. Having IEDR and a referendum commission limit what can and cannot be registered would not be a good thing and the referendum would be over by the time anything would be decided. IEDR has already said that the registrations are in accordance with the regulations so despite feelings being hurt and the usual windbaggery, there's little to be done other than initiating a dispute resolution process and making money for lawyers.
Regards...jmcc
--
Irish Linux Users Group
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ILUG" group.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/a/linux.ie/group/ilug/ <https://groups.google.com/a/linux.ie/group/ilug/>.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/a/linux.ie/d/msgid/ilug/17739e60-6ca8-4d51-b07c-e2ea0d3f398c%40linux.ie <https://groups.google.com/a/linux.ie/d/msgid/ilug/17739e60-6ca8-4d51-b07c-e2ea0d3f398c%40linux.ie?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.