<div>This is a really interesting issue, because I can understand how the casual observer could view .feedback as engaging in deceptive and unfair business practices. It appears to me that all .feedback websites have the same template. When I went to the .feedback registry, I discovered that their domain names are sold as an all-inclusive, non-customisable platform, with differentiated fees for trademark holders versus those who do not own a trademark. In addition, the registry restricts the freedom of domain name owners to customise their website or to choose their own webhost. Self-hosting is only available with the purchase of the "self-serve add-on" for USD $720 per year plus $5,000 application fee per domain name, which strikes me as unusual. <br></div><div><br></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block "><div class="protonmail_signature_block-user "><div>Ayden <br></div></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block-proton protonmail_signature_block-empty"><br></div></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="protonmail_quote" type="cite"><div>-------- Original Message --------<br></div><div>Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [Ncph-intersessional2017] .FEEDBACK PICDRP Update to NCPH Intersessional Participants<br></div><div>Local Time: 16 February 2017 7:32 PM<br></div><div>UTC Time: 16 February 2017 19:32<br></div><div>From: stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca<br></div><div>To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc@lists.ncsg.is><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><p><span style="font-size:undefinedpx" class="size"><span class="font" style="font-family:"Lucida Grande"">Seems important that
we engage on this, can folks who are at the intercessional
weigh in and brief us on what we might want to do?</span></span><br></p><p><span style="font-size:undefinedpx" class="size"><span class="font" style="font-family:"Lucida Grande"">cheers SP</span></span><br></p><div class="moz-forward-container"><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>-------- Forwarded Message --------<br></div><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" class="moz-email-headers-table"><tbody><tr><th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">Subject:<br></th><td>[Ncph-intersessional2017] .FEEDBACK PICDRP Update to
NCPH Intersessional Participants<br></td></tr><tr><th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">Date:<br></th><td>Thu, 16 Feb 2017 19:06:44 +0000<br></td></tr><tr><th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">From:<br></th><td>Winterfeldt, Brian J. <a href="mailto:BWinterfeldt@mayerbrown.com" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" rel="noreferrer nofollow noopener"><BWinterfeldt@mayerbrown.com></a><br></td></tr><tr><th valign="BASELINE" nowrap="nowrap" align="RIGHT">To:<br></th><td><a href="mailto:ncph-intersessional2017@icann.org" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" rel="noreferrer nofollow noopener">ncph-intersessional2017@icann.org</a> <a href="mailto:ncph-intersessional2017@icann.org" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" rel="noreferrer nofollow noopener"><ncph-intersessional2017@icann.org></a><br></td></tr></tbody></table><div><br></div><div><br></div><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Dear NCPH Intersessional Participants:</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">It was great
working with all of you during our NCPH Intersessional
meeting! Following up on our
discussion during the meeting, I write to provide some
additional background information on the .FEEDBACK Public
Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Procedure
(PICDRP) currently pending at ICANN. I know a number of you were
interested in learning more about the issue, so hopefully
this summary provides some helpful additional detail. </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">As you may
know, ICANN created the PICDRP to permit any person who has
been harmed to ask ICANN to take action when a new gTLD
registry operator violates its Public Interest Commitments
(“PICs”). PICs are special provisions in the registry’s
contract with ICANN. PICs are intended to ensure that the
registry operates its gTLD in the public interest, free from
fraudulent or deceptive activity, and in accordance with
principles of transparency and non-discrimination.</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Unfortunately,
from the moment Top Level Spectrum, Inc. (TLS) launched
.FEEDBACK, it (and parties acting in concert with it),
unleashed an escalating series of deceptive marketing
practices that violate its PICs, and the promises it made to
ICANN when it first applied for the exclusive right to run
.FEEDBACK. TLS’s deceptive conduct violates its own
policies, terms and conditions that it imposes on others,
and violates certain applicable laws, including consumer
protection laws. More specifically, as detailed in the
complaint, TLS:</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><ul type="disc" style="margin-top:0in"><li style="color:#1F497D;mso-list:l2 level1
lfo3" class="MsoNormal">Promised they would run .FEEDBACK as a place for
genuine commentary, whether positive or negative when TLS
hired paid reviewers to write and post fabricated reviews on
.FEEDBACK and cut and pasted users’ comments posted years
earlier from Yelp. TLS never disclosed that such reviews are
not from actual customers, its role in soliciting and hiring
paid reviewers, and the fact that the vast majority of such
reviews (62%) come from users located in the Seattle,
Washington area, near TLS’s headquarters.<br></li></ul><p style="margin-left:.5in" class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><ul type="disc" style="margin-top:0in"><li style="color:#1F497D;mso-list:l2 level1
lfo3" class="MsoNormal">Launched a marketing program called FREE.FEEDBACK,
deceptively targeted brand owners to validate and renew
.FEEDBACK domain names they never sought to register in the
first place. The FREE.FEEDBACK program resulted in brand
owners being targeted by phishing schemes.<br></li></ul><p style="margin-left:.5in" class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><ul type="disc" style="margin-top:0in"><li style="color:#1F497D;mso-list:l2 level1
lfo3" class="MsoNormal">Repeatedly changed its own policies and marketing
programs in a confusing, unclear, nontransparent manner, and
with the intent to discriminate against brand owners,
(including self-allocating domain names bypassing the
Sunrise Period protections, and charging exorbitant and
discriminatory pricing for brand owners while offering the
identical domain names to others for “dirt cheap”).<br></li></ul><p style="margin-left:.5in" class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">I emphasize
that the complaint is <u>not</u> an attempt to challenge the
ostensible purpose of TLDs like .FEEDBACK to promote free
expression or facilitate genuine public commentary or
discourse, whether it be positive or negative about a
company. The complaint is intended solely to address TLS’s
deceptive practices. TLS’s own practices, including
populating the majority of live .FEEDBACK websites with
phony commentary and making unauthorized comments copied
from third party websites like Yelp (including years-old
reviews that are post-dated on the .FEEDBACK site to give
the appearance that it is a recent comment) undermine any
legitimate purpose behind this TLD.</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Unfortunately,
we recently identified a number of additional ongoing
incidents of fraudulent and deceptive conduct being
perpetrated in the .FEEDBACK TLD. For example, we found
that some .FEEDBACK websites contain what appear to be
official customer service phone numbers on the
FACEBOOK.FEEDBACK, WHATSAPP.FEEDBACK, and INSTAGRAM.FEEDBACK
websites, but which actually appear to be used in connection
with various well-known consumer scams. <i>See </i>National
Public Radio, <a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/01/31/511824829/-facebook-customer-service-is-a-scam-literally" rel="noreferrer nofollow noopener">Searching for ‘Facebook Customer Service’
Can Lead to A Scam</a> (Jan. 31, 2017). In addition, we
also discovered that many .FEEDBACK websites contain false
or inaccurate contact information about the companies that
are the subject of .FEEDBACK websites. For example, a
.FEEDBACK page for a particular company is supposed to
include the authoritative phone number and address where
consumers can reach that company. Instead, we have found
that .FEEDBACK pages often contain incorrect or non-working
phone numbers.</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">These kinds
fraudulent activities harm businesses, and consumers who
seek real and trustworthy feedback about companies or are
looking for customer support. These deceptive practices are
exactly the kind of registry misconduct the PICs were
designed to prevent.</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Our hope is
that ICANN and a PICDRP Standing Panel will fully
investigate TLS and the parties acting in concert with it,
render a formal determination as to TLS’s PIC violations,
and impose appropriate sanctions and remedial measures
against TLS.</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">ICANN must not
only take action to address this registry’s misconduct, but
also send a message that it will not tolerate these
practices in any other TLDs. </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">The full
complaint that has been submitted to ICANN is publicly
available <a href="https://www.markmonitor.com/downloads/PICDRPexhibits/" rel="noreferrer nofollow noopener">here</a>.</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">We are
currently seeking some additional procedural details from
ICANN regarding the status of the matter and next steps.</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">I hope this
summary provides a helpful overview of the .FEEDBACK PICDRP.
I would be happy to discuss the matter further during our
remaining time together at the Intersessional, by email, or
at the ICANN 58 meeting next month in Copenhagen.</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Best regards,<a name="_GoBack"></a></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Brian</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Brian J.
Winterfeldt</span></b><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Co-Head of
Global Brand Management and Internet Practice</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Mayer Brown LLP</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"><a href="mailto:bwinterfeldt@mayerbrown.com" rel="noreferrer nofollow noopener">bwinterfeldt@mayerbrown.com</a></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">1999 K Street,
NW </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Washington, DC
20006-1101</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">202.263.3284 direct
dial</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">202.830.0330 fax</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">1221 Avenue of
the Americas</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">New York, New
York 10020-1001</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">212.506.2345 direct
dial</span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"> </span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <br></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <br></p></div><p>__________________________________________________________________________<br></p><div><br></div><p>This email and any files transmitted with it are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed. If you have received this email in error please
notify the system manager. If you are not the named addressee
you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.<br></p></div></blockquote><div><br></div>