Earlier this week, Afilias published a list of claims that had
already been made to the registry. However, several of the claims
appear to be based on trade mark rights that do not exist. The
claim procedure requires trade mark owners to provide a date the
mark registration was issued, the country where the mark was issued
and the registration number.
However, it appears that nobody checks the legitimacy of trade
mark claims at this stage. Instead, after the Sunrise Period
expires later this month, there is a period during which
applications for names can be challenged under rules very similar
to those used for cybersquatting arbitration. Some people seem to
be submitting applications for names based on generic words, such
as business.info or sex.info, where there is unlikely to be a trade
mark.
By claiming that they have a trade mark, perhaps by concocting a
registration number, in the absence of checks or a successful
challenge, the applicants hope they will win ownership of
potentially valuable .info names before 12th September when the
application procedure opens to the public on a first-come,
first-served basis.
Where more than one application for the same name is made during
the Sunrise Period, a system of random selection awards the name to
one applicant. Unsuccessful applicants can then consider whether to
bring legal action during a 120-day challenge period. Challenges
costs the challenger the sum of $295.
According to Newsbytes, Afilias is determining the extent of
fraudulent applications in the Sunrise Period to establish whether
further action is necessary to ensure .info domains are fairly
administered. However, ICANN will likely be the body to face most
criticism for perceived failings in the .info and .biz allocation
procedures, since it authorised the terms on which the registries
for each domain operate.
