<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 6:59 AM, Guru गुरु <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Guru@itforchange.net" target="_blank">Guru@itforchange.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I thought this posting on another list may be useful to the
discussion on the IGC thread "Some more legal tangles for ICANN"<br>
regards,<br>
Guru<br>
<br>
-------- Original Message --------
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">Subject: </th>
<td>[Members] US District Court for DC - IRAN/SYRIA - ICANN</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">Date: </th>
<td>Mon, 30 Jun 2014 13:14:12 +0200</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">From: </th>
<td>Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal <a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank"><jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net></a></td></tr></tbody></table></div></blockquote><div><br>
</div><div><snip><br><br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr><th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE"><br></th><td><br></td></tr><tr><th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE"><br></th><td><br></td></tr></tbody></table><div><i><div><div><div style="font-style:normal">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-style:normal">Nobody really owns a
domain name, and there are many indications that it could
considered in the same way for TLDs. A TLD or domain name
'holder'/'tenant' pays a 'lease' for a domain. If the .COM
is the property of ICANN or DoC, then .IR would then be
the property of its current tenant. As with any lease, it
can end if not renewed or be terminated by the delegating
authority (if nobody is ultimate owner). So we definitely
have a situation that isnot clear, as a domain name is
still not a property but holds intellectual property
rights, turning it into a very valuable asset. You do not
own the domain, you own the right to use it. This still
means that any TLD has a commercial value, including
ccTLDs, and is therefore an asset and subject to a Court
sequestration warrant or redelegation request. And in this
case, the judge is not asking for the moon, I would say.</div></div></div></i></div></div></blockquote><div><br><br></div><div>I like ICANNN's formulation in their reply to the Writ:<br><br>"ccTLD can be thought of as a zip code. That zip code may encompass
many different addresses, and those addresses in turn may correspond to
certain places on the Internet that people can access, such as websites.
But the street address itself is not property, nor is the zip code in
which the street address exists…To the extent a ccTLD is capable of a
legal definition, it is a collection of technical and administrative
services, rather than property"<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;font-size:12px"> <br></div></div><br>-- <br>Cheers,<br><br>McTim<br>"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
</div></div>