<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
    <h1> Congress to ICANN: No You Can’t </h1>
    <h2> </h2>
    <div style="display: block;" id="socialTop_new"
      class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style"> <a title="Send to
        Facebook" target="_blank"
href="http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&winname=addthis&pub=ra-4d95fcbc4c4f5ecb&source=tbx-250&lng=en-US&s=facebook&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationaljournal.com%2Ftech%2Fcongress-to-icann-no-you-can-t-20110504&title=NationalJournal.com%20-%20Congress%20to%20ICANN%3A%20No%20You%20Can%E2%80%99t%20-%20Wednesday%2C%20May%204%2C%202011&ate=AT-ra-4d95fcbc4c4f5ecb/-/-/4dc2e2aec7cc36d8/1&uid=4dc2e2aec9323a13&sms_ss=1&at_xt=1&tt=0"
        class="addthis_button_facebook at300b"><span class="at300bs
          at15nc at15t_facebook"></span></a> <a title="Tweet This"
        target="_blank" class="addthis_button_twitter at300b"><span
          class="at300bs at15nc at15t_twitter"></span></a> <a
        title="Email" class="addthis_button_email at300b"><span
          class="at300bs at15nc at15t_email"></span></a> <a
        class="addthis_button_compact at300m"><span class="at300bs
          at15nc at15t_compact"></span></a> </div>
    <p class="byline">By <a
        href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/reporters/bio/33">David
        Hatch</a></p>
    <h5 class="timestamp"> May 4, 2011 | 7:58 p.m. <br>
      Updated: May 4, 2011 | 10:03 p.m. </h5>
    <div id="articleBody">
      <p>An effort to dramatically expand the number of Internet
        suffixes beyond those already in use—such as .com, .net, and
        .org—met with bipartisan resistance on Wednesday in a House
        Judiciary subcommittee.</p>
      <p>During a hearing before Judiciary’s Intellectual Property,
        Competition, and the Internet Subcommittee, the Internet
        Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (better known as
        ICANN) said its proposal would pave the way for hundreds or even
        thousands of additional suffixes, resulting in more choices and
        innovation.</p>
      <p>But critics suggest that ICANN, a non-profit based in
        California, would reap a financial windfall at the expense of
        companies and non-profits that would be forced to “defensively”
        register their websites with the new suffixes to protect their
        trademarks.</p>
      <p>“I would ask that we balance the costs and benefits of this
        proposal before a final decision is made to go forward,” said
        Subcommittee Chairman <strong>Bob Goodlatte</strong>, R-Va.,
        who joined members from both parties in urging ICANN to delay
        final implementation until concerns about trademark
        infringement, identity theft, and increased business sector
        costs can be adequately resolved. While he doesn’t oppose a
        limited expansion of Internet suffixes, the specifics of ICANN’s
        approach are troubling to him, he said.<strong> </strong></p>
      <p>With Goodlatte and other hearing participants projecting that
        ICANN could earn tens of millions of dollars in additional fees,
        Rep. <strong>Maxine Waters</strong>, D-Calif., asked: “Where
        will all this new money end up?<strong>”</strong></p>
      <p>Kurt Pritz, senior VP of stakeholder relations at ICANN, said
        strong safeguards would be in place to protect trademarks,
        including the ability of parties to object to the adoption of
        new suffixes. He said ICANN would constantly evolve its plan in
        an effort to respond to concerns that might arise.</p>
      <p>But Goodlatte challenged him on those points, noting that ICANN
        has not taken any preemptive steps to ensure that “legitimate
        businesses” and non-profits such as the Red Cross and the U.S.
        Olympic Committee would not be victimized as a result of the
        changes.</p>
      <p>Trademark holders are worried about a flood of knock-off sites
        designed to confuse consumers. For example, Coca Cola could have
        headaches if someone were to register “Coca-Cola,” with the
        suffix .soda, to create a new address, <a
          href="http://www.coca-cola.soda/">www.Coca-Cola.soda</a>, not
        affiliated with the company.</p>
      <p>Echoing Goodlatte’s concerns was ranking member <strong>John
          Conyers</strong>, D-Mich., who said: “I’m worried that the
        benefits will not outweigh the concerns raised by stakeholders."
        Conyers recommended a follow-up hearing on the matter and called
        for ICANN’s proposal to be “held up.”</p>
      <p>“This has such enormity—the scale of it, the magnitude of the
        change, the implications for the public, that it behooves
        everybody to take the time necessary to make sure that we do our
        best to get it right,” agreed Mei-Lan Stark, senior VP for Fox
        Entertainment Group, who testified on behalf of the
        International Trademark Association.</p>
    </div>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 

</pre>
  </body>
</html>