[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [Ncph-intersessional2017] .FEEDBACK PICDRP Update to NCPH Intersessional Participants

Sat Feb 18 21:15:01 EET 2017

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.

Ayden

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [Ncph-intersessional2017] .FEEDBACK PICDRP Update to NCPH Intersessional Participants
Local Time: 16 February 2017 7:32 PM
UTC Time: 16 February 2017 19:32
From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
To: ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>

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?

cheers SP

-------- Forwarded Message --------

Subject:
[Ncph-intersessional2017] .FEEDBACK PICDRP Update to NCPH Intersessional Participants

Date:
Thu, 16 Feb 2017 19:06:44 +0000

From:
Winterfeldt, Brian J. [<BWinterfeldt at mayerbrown.com>](mailto:BWinterfeldt at mayerbrown.com)

To:
ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org [<ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org>](mailto:ncph-intersessional2017 at icann.org)

Dear NCPH Intersessional Participants:

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.

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.

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:

- 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.

- 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.

- 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”).

I emphasize that the complaint is not 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.

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. See National Public Radio, [Searching for ‘Facebook Customer Service’ Can Lead to A Scam](http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/01/31/511824829/-facebook-customer-service-is-a-scam-literally) (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.

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.

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.

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.

The full complaint that has been submitted to ICANN is publicly available [here](https://www.markmonitor.com/downloads/PICDRPexhibits/).

We are currently seeking some additional procedural details from ICANN regarding the status of the matter and next steps.

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.

Best regards,[]

Brian

Brian J. Winterfeldt

Co-Head of Global Brand Management and Internet Practice

Mayer Brown LLP

bwinterfeldt at mayerbrown.com

1999 K Street, NW

Washington, DC 20006-1101

202.263.3284 direct dial

202.830.0330 fax

1221 Avenue of the Americas

New York, New York 10020-1001

212.506.2345 direct dial

__________________________________________________________________________

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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170218/8ad1c5b4/attachment.htm>