(Source: DNJournal.com)
(Interact with Philip Corwin on GeoDomainer.com)

Philip Corwin is legal council for the Internet Commerce Association (ICA). A few months ago, I informed readers I would try and get some answers to common questions and concerns from the legal standpoint of what ICA has done to protect the domain industry. Philip has done an outstanding job presenting a very informative interview for your reading pleasure. If you wish to ask Philip questions, please be advised that he will be attending the Traffic Show this week and may not be able to respond timely until he returns from the show. However, he will address comments as time permits.

(SMO) Since launching the ICA in December 2006, how has ICA impacted the domain industry by battling corporate America?

(PC) The ICA was launched in the fall of 2006 by a group of domain name industry leaders who believed that, like every other industry, it needed to organize to tell its story and defend its interests. The .com settlement between ICANN and VeriSign was the catalyst for its formation, but I don’t believe that the ICA is best defined by who it’s against but by who it is for — and it is for its members. Whether the issue is assuring that our voice is heard as ICANN develops its policies; that the rights of domain registrants and trademark owners are appropriately balanced; that the UDRP is really uniform, fair, and predictable; and that the industry’s advertising partners operate transparently in a competitive marketplace; we will be a strong, consistent, and hopefully effective advocate for those individuals and companies in the domain name space who support our efforts.

(SMO) What are some major threats facing the domain industry and what can people do to make a difference?

(PC) The biggest threat to this industry is that it may let others define it in a negative way, because if that happens the door is open to all sorts of other threats. The domain investment and development industry has a great story to tell about innovative and hard-working individuals creating a visionary new enterprise that fosters e-commerce and serves consumers in innumerable ways. And many of our most successful leaders are giving back to the community in a multitude of generous ways. One of the ICA’s goals is to raise sufficient funds for a positive public relations effort in order to dispel the notion that we’re about nothing more than cybersquatting, a falsehood promulgated by those who would like to unfairly appropriate the value that domainers have created.

(SMO) The Snowe Bill is a hot topic in the industry. What is the biggest threat domain owners face with this proposed bill?

(PC) Domainers investing thousands or even millions of dollars in a domain name are going to be very careful that it can’t be taken away in a UDRP action or under a national law like the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA). Nobody’s going to spend that kind of money on an infringing name, and while there’s always some uncertainty, we have a pretty good idea of what passes muster under those rules. The biggest problem with the Snowe bill from our viewpoint is that it would have set up yet another set of rules in which domains that are fine under UDRP or ACPA could become infringing and subject to challenge and confiscation by overzealous trademark owners. That’s fundamentally unfair and that’s why we fought the proposal from the day it was introduced. Of course, from the public’s viewpoint the bill has another glaring deficiency in that it’s labeled an anti-phishing measure but it would have little or no practical effect in stopping online financial fraud.

(SMO) What has ICA done to protest this proposed bill?

(PC) The ICA took a multitude of actions against the Snowe bill. These included:

* Immediately initiating discussions with the offices of members of the Senate Commerce and Judiciary Committees as to why the bill was ineffective against phishing and why it was wrong to establish a new and more onerous regime of trademark-like protection..
* Providing information to our members regarding the bill’s threat and deficiencies, as well as instructions on how to effectively contact their Senators — and thanks to all the many who did so, because it made a real difference!
* Reaching out to technology-oriented interest groups and trade associations to ask them to oppose the legislation or at least refrain from endorsing it. That’s why we saw groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation come out against it, and why you didn’t see major financial services and technology trade associations that get harmed by phishing jump onboard.

I’m happy to say that the bill looks like it’s on the back burner for now, but I fully expect the interests who backed it to regroup and come back at us next year in a new Congress.

(SMO) Besides the Snowe Bill, what other advances has the ICA initiated to protect the domain industry and domain owners?

(PC) We are active every week in Washington. We’ve talked with key individuals on Capitol Hill and in the Commerce Department about the future of ICANN, and we submitted a lengthy statement and spoke at a February Commerce Department forum looking at whether the U.S. should terminate its oversight of ICANN when it’s up for review in the fall of 2009. Just this month I sat down with a Counsel for the House Antitrust Task Force to discuss the state of competition in online advertising and the future of Google and Yahoo! By taking the initiative on issues like this, by being available to explain our industry and views to key decision makers and journalists, we advance our members’ interests.

(SMO) What are some future plans the ICA will deliver to stay proactive against corporate America that will impact domain owners favorably?

(PC) While you can’t foresee every issue that will pop up you can anticipate most. For example, 2009 will mark the tenth anniversary of the enactment of the ACPA and I’m being told that there’s some chance the next Congress will review and possibly amend it. So we’re already having discussions within the domain community about what changes we’d like to see that benefit domain name owners, even as we’re engaging in discussions with a variety of interested parties regarding the legitimate interests of domain name registrants and how they can best be balanced against those of trademark owners.

(SMO) Many readers do not have a clue on expenses involved in protecting the domain industry against the big guys. How expensive is it for the ICA to combat lobbyists and corporate America on important topics affecting the domain industry?

(PC) If the ICA had the resources we would expand beyond lobbying in Washington and representing domainers within ICANN. We really should have some presence in Brussels because the Internet is global and the EU is the next biggest market after the U.S. We’d like to support domainers in critical UDRP and trademark actions that can set good or bad precedents for the entire industry, and that takes funds to retain the services of top counsel. We need to have a positive P.R. capability to define ourselves positively as well as react to any negative stories before they gain traction. All that costs money — for example, you can imagine that it is not inexpensive for Michael Collins and I to attend the three ICANN meetings this year in New Delhi, Paris and Cairo, but it’s absolutely indispensable that we be there for our members. I have consistently said that to do the job right we need to aim for at least a $1 million annual budget. That may sound like a lot, but that is a very tight budget for an effective trade association and it really is achievable considering that the industry’s assets are worth billions of dollars and that we generate more than $1 billion a year to Google and Yahoo! We’re just about halfway toward that goal and I am optimistic that we will get there as domainers see the difference the ICA is making.

(SMO) How has ICA worked with ICANN to improve the domain industry?

(PC) ICA was admitted just a few months ago to ICANN’s Commercial and Business Constituency so now we have a formal role in its policy making process. I think we had a very positive effect last year when we publicly asked some tough questions about the collapse of Registerfly, an event that victimized many domainers, and we saw a very substantial change in ICANN’s attitude and actions soon thereafter. We’ve been supporting actions to eliminate abusive domain tasting because that activity creates a negative image for the entire industry. We’ve been very vocal in demanding that ICANN open up the closed door meetings of its Government Affairs Committee because that is an internal group that has produced some of the policy proposals of greatest concern to us. Overall I think our presence within ICANN has dispelled a lot of misimpressions and gained our industry a new degree of understanding and respect.

(SMO) In closing, please share any additional information you would like readers to know about the future of the domain industry and the importance of supporting an organization like ICA.

(PC) I think the domain industry has a bright and prosperous future as long as those who work within it support an organization like the ICA. Every other industry understands that it is of critical importance to define itself in the most positive way to policymakers and the press, and to be an active and tireless advocate, and that the only way to do that is to support an organization to act as a collective eyes, ears, and most importantly a unified voice. Change is inevitable - the question is whether domainers want to shape the changes that are coming in a positive way or be the passive victims of negative changes. The domain comuunity is made up of strong, self-starting winners, not passive losers, so I really think the community will see its self-interest in sustaining the ICA — and our support has been growing with each passing month, for which all of us involved in the Association are deeply appreciative.