Toute l'actualité des noms de domaine et nouveaux gTLDs

Archives de mots clés: domain

China’s Baidu Sues US Domain Registrar After Hack

Top Chinese search engine has sued its U.S. domain registrar over a hack that took down the Web site, alleging negligence by the U.S. company, Baidu said Wednesday.
Users had trouble accessing for several hours last week after the company’s domain name server in the U.S. was tampered with. The Iranian Cyber Army, the same group that took down Twitter last month, also appeared to be behind the attack on Baidu.

Baidu’s lawsuit, filed in a court in New York, seeks related damages and alleges « gross negligence » by led to the service disruption, Baidu said in a statement. Baidu only said was hit by the outage, and that mirror site had not been affected. Domain service providers including provide the setup needed to take Internet users to the correct Web site when they type a domain name like

No one at was available to comment.

Baidu’s move comes just two days after Baidu said chief technology officer Yinan Li had left the company. Li was the second high-ranking executive to leave the company in a month, following the resignation of chief operating officer Peng Ye. Baidu said both resigned for personal reasons.

Baidu’s business has been hit by recent difficulties switching advertisers to a new bid system.

The events add to uncertainty in the Chinese search market after Google, Baidu’s biggest rival, last week said it might withdraw from the country over censorship and cyberattacks. Google’s Chinese search engine remains accessible in the country, but authorities have said Google must follow local laws when asked about the U.S. company’s plans to stop censoring search results.

Author: Owen Fletcher
Source: PC World- Business center

.CN Update – Suspension of New Registrations for .CN

We regret to inform you CNNIC has informed Neustar that in order to implement a better methodology to verify registrant information from overseas registrations, they have made the difficult decision to temporarily suspend new registrations from overseas registrars starting at: 

18:00 PM January 6, 2010 (Beijing time)
10:00 AM January 6, 2010 (GMT)
05:00 AM January 6, 2010 (EST)

Please note that our understanding is that this only affects NEW registrations.

Paris Wins in Disturbing Domain Name Arbitration Decision

Paris wins domain as arbitrator throws out “registration AND use” in bad faith.

In September I wrote about the city of Paris, France filing a UDRP against three domain names:,, and Paris was just handed a victory in the case; the other two cases are pending.

What’s disturbing about the case is that the panel found that the domain name was likely not registered in bad faith, but still handed the domain over on the basis that it was later used in bad faith.

Under the header “Reconsideration of the bad faith requirement”, arbitrator Andrew F. Christie cited previous cases decided by a “distinguished” panelist who found that domain names don’t need to be registered AND used in bad faith, as the UDRP states. Instead, this panelist decided that a domain not registered in bad faith could still violate the policy if it was later used in bad faith.

Christie writes:

The intent of the Policy is to provide a fair and efficient mechanism for trademark owners to obtain redress in situations where their trademark rights are abused as a result of bad faith activities of domain name registrants. There seems no reason in logic or in principle why the availability of redress should be confined to situations where bad faith is present at the time of acquisition of the domain name

Well, the policy is also supposed to provide a fair mechanism for domain name owners. That Paris filed two egregious cases of reverse domain name hijacking at the same time it filed the case should cause any panel to give the benefit of the doubt to the respondent.

Indeed, Christie doesn’t think the domain owner knew about the Parvi trademark at the time of his registration:

…Although it is certainly possible that the Respondent was aware of the Complainant’s PARVI trademark, and of the Complainant’s programs under that trademark, at the time the Respondent registered the domain name, this seems unlikely given the different geographical locations and native languages of the Complainant and the Respondent. Thus, this Panel is not satisfied, on the present record, of the probability that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name with the intention of benefiting from the Complainant’s PARVI trademark.

If the domain wasn’t registered in bad faith but was later used in a way to violate Paris’ trademark, its redress is in the courts, not UDRP. This sort wholesale change and expansion of UDRP by panelists is one of the reasons people are questioning the implementation of the policy. Whenever a panelist writes that his reasoning is “a logical and incremental evolution of panel thinking”, one should give pause.

Perhaps Andrew Christie is on a crusade to implement his vision on UDRP. He was also the presiding panelist on the case, which broke with precedent by suggesting that the top level domain should be considered part of the domain for trademark purposes.


Nominet Releases Goldmine of Domain Renewal Statistics

Report provides insight into expired domain names.

Nominet, the registry for the .uk country code, has released its 2009 Domain Name Industry Report (pdf). It includes in-depth stats about domain renewal rates and the reasons people let domains expire. This data should be useful to the ICANN Working Group examining the issue of expiring domains.

As way of background, there are a couple differences between .uk and most other domains. First, registrations are for two years. Second, Nominet sends renewal reminders to customers (in addition to the registrar sending reminders).

For those people renewing their domains, Nominet found:

– 60% renewed due to a reminder from their registrar (same figure as similar research from 2007)
– 25% believe their domain names renew automatically (2007: 22%)
– 7.3% renewed after receiving reminders from Nominet (2007: 8.6%)

Fully 98.2% of those surveyed recall receiving reminders about renewing their domain name. This isn’t too surprising. After all, if Nominet was able to reach people for its study, those people likely have up-to-date contact information on their domain names. As I’ve said before, the number one reason someone neglects to renew an important domain name is because they have outdated or false whois data.

This graph explains the reasons people decided to not renew their domains:


This chart shows something we all know, but it’s still interesting: if you get someone to renew a domain once, odds are they’ll keep renewing it:


The Nominet report has lots of other renewal and registration data, and is worth reviewing.

SnapNames User Name “Halvarez” Was Nelson Brady, VP of Engineering Bidding on Domain Names

According to a statement from’s SnapNames, an employee was found to have bid in 5% of their auctions since 2005 and in some cases arranged for a partial refund of the sales price after winning an auction. DNN also confirmed the bidder as Nelson Brady, the VP of Engineering. He was bidding under the username “halvarez”.

In a statement issued today, the company offers compensation to any potentially affected customer:

To avoid any question about whether the company benefited from this conduct, SnapNames will offer a rebate to impacted customers, including 5.22% interest (the highest applicable federal rate during the affected time period), of the difference between the prices they paid in winning auctions, and the prices they would have paid had the employee not bid in the auctions. Impacted customers will be notified by SnapNames or its representative with instructions for the offer of a rebate.

SnapNames also has taken further action to ensure its policies regarding auctions are followed, and the company remains committed to taking whatever action is necessary to protect the integrity of its auction platform.

SnapNames deeply regrets this situation and is committed to addressing its customers’ needs quickly and fairly.

Customers with questions may contact SnapNames at or via phone at +1 (866) 690-6279 (toll-free in the U.S.) and +1 (503) 241-8547 (outside the U.S.). The company has also posted a FAQ on their website.

The employee has been dismissed from the company and SnapNames is further investigating the incident.

For years, the domain community has questioned specific bidding practices by at least one frequent bidder with the user name “halvarez” . Forum posts have questioned and speculated on this bidder’s unusual activity for many years and SnapNames officials confirmed today that this user name is indeed the internal employee.  We now also know that the employee was the VP of Engineering, Nelson Brady, as confirmed by a spokesperson of the company. . . .


author : Frank Michlick

Google Steps Up Domain Name Arbitration Cases

Google steps up domain trademark enforcement for its brands.

GoogleAfter many years of using domain arbitration as the last resort for picking up trademark domains, Google has gotten involved in the domain arbitration process in a big way this year. Either it is changing its trademark domain recapturing process or the number of AWOL trademark registrants is on the rise.

When Google filed a case for last year, my question to Google was ‘what took you so long?’. A Google spokesperson responded:

We seek to recover domain names that are likely to confuse users into thinking that sites are authorized by Google. Our first step is to contact the domain registrant to express our concerns and seek a voluntary transfer of the domain name. In this case we tried to contact the registrant several times to no avail and as a result filed an UDRP arbitration.

If that’s still the policy, then it is having a tough time getting registrants to respond to its correspondence: so far this year the company has filed 24 UDRP actions, compared to 16 last year. Google filed five cases last month alone.

Last month Google filed cases for,,, &, and

Some of the cases Google won this year include,,, and

According to records at UDRPsearch, Google has filed 82 cases. It has lost only one: a controversial case for That case resulted in a lawsuit.

 Source Evicted in Domain Dispute

Vacation rental directory loses domain name dispute., Inc. has lost its domain dispute for against Frank Schilling’s Name Administration. Name Administration was defended by domain attorney John Berryhill.

Name Administration bought the domain name for $1,400 in an expired domain name auction in 2005. acquired the Home Away From Home trademark from another company in 2007.

The arbitration panel at National Arbitration Forum found that Name Administration had rights and legitimate interests in the generic domain name. The panel found that Name Administration’s use of the domain name as a pay-per-click web site was a bona fide use of the domain name, and also noted that does not have exclusive rights to the common phrase “home away from home”:

The Panel also finds that the terms of the domain name are generic and of common use and therefore, Complainant does not have an exclusive monopoly on the terms on the Internet.

Hurting’s case was that, although it acquired the trademark “Home Away from Home”, it has barely used the term in commerce — and has used it in its generic nature on its web site.


New Domain Names in Indian Languages

The internet is ushering in a  new era with the domain names opened up to non-Latin scripts. In India, all preparations have been made to make the process of registering domain names in Indian languages. But even after this, those in the know fear the spate of cybersquatting cases to haunt the process. With variety of languages in India, experts are wary of people using the process for unfair gains.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers board on Friday formally approved the new Internationalized Domain Name Fast Track Process. This is the one of the biggest changes in its four-decade history of the governing body of internet. In India, Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC)is the nodal agency to oversee the process. It had organised a workshop on Thursday in Pune about the process. During the discussion, it was highlighted how the switch over to the indigenous languages is full of hurdles and possibilities of cybersquatting as well as typosquatting.

Mahesh Kulkarni, program co-ordinator at CDAC told Pune Mirror, “The main thrust of CDAC is on introducing domain name .भारत which will be an alternative to .in. This is the only top level domain available in Indian languages yet.
The next line of action for names like .net or .org will be decided after considering the repsonse to this system. The main problem is that of Homographs (words looking similar) and homophones (words sounding similar). If we start to remove the homographs, then there will be many constraints on the domain name registration. Hence we have decided to look into the homophones and bar them from the registration.”

As for cybersquatting, he acknowledged that people can take advantage of name registration in new languages. “Hence we have formulated a policy to approach the people who have .in domain name and tell them to register .भारत. If they fail to do so, then any other person can register same domain in Indian language. Since we have control only over .in domain name, it is opened up. We have even not considered domain names because proper words are to be standardized.
Department of Technology and CDAC will monitor the process and will open other domain names after taking appropriate measures.”

Kulkarni said ICANN has put the International Domain Names on fast process.  But lot of precautions has to be taken in the process. In the next stage, localised domain names will be taken up.