iEstates.com

While some of the .CA registrars are apparently still having problems with this morning’s switchover of the .CA registry to EPP, the registry appears to have successfully completed their migration. So what do the changes mean, aside from another backend protocol being used for registrars to connect to the registry?

• Registrants will now generally only deal with their registrars and not have to interact with CIRA directly.
• There are no more CIRA user IDs
• Domains are Auto-Renewed on a Registry level – just like COM/NET/ORG the registry now automatically renews the domain at the expiry date and charges the registrar account. It is to be expected that registrars will however delete any domains that are not set to auto-renew on the registrar level, just like for the gTLDs.
• New 3rd and 4th level domains are no longer supported with the exception of 4th level municipal domains. Existing 3rd and 4th level domains will be grandfathered.
• Registrars can now offer their own whois privacy system for individual registrants.
• The number of contacts per domain is now limited and not maintained across registrars.
• New Data used to validate Canadian Presence Requirements (CPR) will be required in 2011.
• Domains can only be transferred to another registrars 60 days after their initial registration or a previous transfer.
• An ownership change of a domain does not require a renewal of the domain name any more.
• “Critical changes” are now processed immediately.

As part of the switchover the registry operator also temporarily disabled the domain deletions, which were usually happening once a week. The process is going to restart on November 3rd, 2011.

(c) 2010 DomainNameNews.com

Advertisement
Upcoming Domain Industry Events, Conferences & Auctions

CIRA denies re-certification for Brandon Gray Internet Services

CIRA, the registry operator of the .CA ccTLD, has denied Brandon Gray Internet Services Inc. the re-certification as a .CA registration on September 10th of this year. The registrar also counts the “Domain Registry of Canada” (DROC) amongst its resellers, which is mostly known for sending official looking renewal reminders/transfer offers to domain registrants. The company also operates the ICANN Accredited registrar NameJuice.

According to the companies, they reassured itbusiness.ca that DROC is a reseller of Brandon Gray Internet Services, simply sharing a postal address in Markham, phone system and extension lists. The registrar is said to have 25 resellers in total.

Now Brandon Gray is suing CIRA for $10 million CAD in damages for the termination of their accreditation. They also say that CIRA has not provided a reason for the denial of the re-certification.

itbusiness.ca writes:

CIRA has also declined comment on the case while it is before the court. But an affidavit filed in court obtained by ITBusiness.ca shows that the authority will defend itself in part by attempting to show Brandon Gray has a “bad reputation in the Internet community,” writes Kelly Campbell, channel manager at CIRA. It discusses the activities of the DROC and other resellers that it says “inextricably linked” to Brandon Gray and says they “have engaged in activities which are inappropriate for any business and highly unethical.”

As reported on the CIRA election campaign forum, the registry also has recently denied a number of applications for registrar accreditation by new registrars, citing the small number of customers as a reason.

[via itbusiness.ca]

(c) 2010 DomainNameNews.com

Zak Muscovitch at DomainConvergence 2008

Guest contributor Zak Muscovitch is a domain name lawyer, based in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He has been practicing domain name law for over ten years and is now running for the election for a seat on the CIRA Board of Directors. Go to http://www.DNattorney.com and http://zak-for-cira.ca/ for more information. Voting is open to CIRA members until noon ET September 29th, 2010.

Two days ago, on September 21, 2010, CIRA (the Canadian Internet Registration Authority) held its Annual General Meeting and Symposium in Toronto, called, “Canadians Connected”, and it was a world class event.

Integrated into the usual corporate housekeeping involved in annual meetings, the Symposium brought together .CA domain name owners from all over the country and a CIRA attendance record was set. Nearly 500 people  participated in person, and hundreds more online.

Orchestrated by CIRA CEO Byron Holland with the support of a small army of capable and dedicated staff, Canadians Connected presented what can only be considered a visionary, and arguably somewhat miraculous, approach to  reinvigorating the Canadian Internet community.

Continue reading after the jump.

CIRA put together some of the best and brightest minds in the digital world. Speakers included:

• Terry O’Reilly, advertising and marketing guru, and host of the groundbreaking CBC radio show, The Age of Persuasion;
• Mitch Joel, social media evangelist and superstar consultant to the world’s top companies;
• Paul Vixie, Internet pioneer and creative genius behind many of the technological innovations that helped create and maintain the Internet;
• John Demco, a living legend who basically gave birth to the .CA registry; and
• Chris O’Neil, Internet advertising expert and newly appointed Google Country Director for Canada, after having returned to his native Canada from the U.S.

We heard Terry O’Neil explain Canada’s unique characteristics and heard him describe how Canada is perceived by others and by ourselves. His insights enabled us to see that Canadians need to be told stories from a Canadian perspective in order to be persuaded. We also learned that Canadians need to be aware of how they are perceived internationally when trying to persuade others. Internet-minded Canadians must appreciate and understand these insights when learning how to market within Canada and abroad. Marketing Canadian goods and services on the Internet is something that Canadians need to do much better to compete globally and Terry O’Reilly inspired us to do that.

We heard Mitch Joel explain that ‘the future is now’, and that we had better learn to embrace the Internet and take advantage of the paradigm-shifting capabilities that it offers. He implored us to ‘burn the ships’ and explore, in a reference to the discovery of the ‘new world’. He showed us how advertising and marketing in the digital age is dramatically different from the old world and we must adapt or be unable to compete.

We heard from John Demco some of the background on how CIRA came to be. Operating from a basement at UBC with a handful of volunteers, he managed and operated the .CA domain name system well before it was transferred to CIRA. Recalling the rudimentary origins of the Canadian Internet and embodying the pioneering spirit, we were inspired to create, to solve, and to innovate.

We heard from Paul Vixie, who can only be described as a one-of-a-kind technological grown-up wiz kid. We felt that he was on a first name basis with the Internet and even knew its parents. He reminded us that the fancy graphical user interfaces and speedy services are supported by a labyrinth of software and hardware that only exists as a result of scientists like him who have come up with solutions and fixes without us even being aware.

We heard from Chris O’Neil who set out what Google believes to be its ‘big bets’ on the future of the Internet. Having the most senior person in Canada from the world’s greatest commercial Internet innovator reminded us that Canada can have an important leadership role in developing Internet commerce both locally and globally.

CIRA was clearly staking its ground as a leader in not only domain name registry management, but also in Internet thought and innovation. Having observed CIRA for many years as a seemingly bureaucratic organization that was not particularly attune to the exciting and important developments in the Internet world, it felt like we were observing the miraculous transformation of a dusty Canadian paperweight to a world-class and visionary exploration vessel. By exploring Canada’s past, place, and future in the Internet world, CIRA presented a convincing case for Canada to lead world in the development and use of the Internet.

To make matters even more exciting, Byron Holland announced the creation of the Canadian Internet Governance Forum. This demonstrated a very serious commitment to exploring Internet and public policy issues with numerous national consultations focusing on Economic Development and Digital Literacy. Byron Holland just returned from Vilnius, Lithuania where he represented Canada at the Internet Governance Forum, where the international participants debated the most important issues regarding the nature and use of the Internet, such as net neutrality, freedom of expression, cyber security, and interoperability. Clearly CIRA has shown through its actions, that it fundamentally understands the need to balance its mandate in both economic and social development and that CIRA can be at its best when it is a leader in the Internet community. Not exactly the staid and simple domain name administrator that it once was.

Canada can very proud that CIRA is leading the way into the great debates and policy discussions that are necessary to inspire change and innovation in the digital universe. Now we must all do our part to harness the inspiration to do better, create more, solve more, adapt more, and take our place as a leader in the global Internet community.

(c) 2010 DomainNameNews.com

Advertisement
Offer: .com/.net domains only $7.98/yr! Specializing in .kr domains $40/yr
Get expired / deleting domains $14.98/yr fixed price

Zak Muscovitch at DomainConvergence 2008

Guest contributor Zak Muscovitch is a domain name lawyer, based in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He has been practicing domain name law for over ten years and is now running for the election for a seat on the CIRA Board of Directors. Go to http://www.DNattorney.com and http://zak-for-cira.ca/ for more information.

The Canadian Internet Registration Authority (“CIRA”) operates Canada’s .CA domain name registry in the “public interest”. Where does this authority come from and what is the “public interest”? During the current 2010 election for CIRA’s Board of Directors, these questions should be raised and debated. CIRA has an important role to fill as the operational manager of the registry, but has an equally important role to fill in terms of governing the .CA space in the public interest.

Read the full article after the jump.

When CIRA was incorporated as a Canadian federal corporation without share capital (otherwise known as a not-for-profit corporation) on December 30, 1998, there was no mention of “the public interest” in its formal objectives as filed with Industry Canada. CIRA’s formal objectives were:

a) to act as the registry for the .CA Internet domain;

b) to provide professional registry services comparable to other major national and international Internet registries;

c) to develop and carry out any other Internet-related registration activities in Canada; and

d) to do all such other things as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the above objects.

In 2006, CIRA made apparently minor revisions to their filed objectives with Industry Canada, so that c), above, now read;

“to develop, carry out and/or support any other Internet-related activities in Canada”.

The change is small, but noteworthy. One can see that “support” of “any internet-related activities” was added, ostensibly expanding CIRA’a objectives to include broader involvement and support in anything Internet related, not just registration related. This is the foundation for CIRA’s mandate to be actively involved in supporting Internet related activities in Canada. But there was still no mention of the “public interest” in CIRA’s formal objectives. So where does the “public interest” come into play for CIRA?

On March 11, 1999, Michael Binder, Assistant Deputy Minister Spectrum, Information Technologies and Telecommunications (Industry Canada), wrote a letter to Rob Hall, then Chairman of the Board of CIRA, to thank John Demco for his management of the registry for the previous ten years, to congratulate CIRA on its incorporation, and to “recognize CIRA as the administrator of the .ca domain space” (the “Binder Letter”).

The Binder Letter essentially confirmed that the Government of Canada was permitting CIRA to run the registry and that CIRA was expected to adopt certain principles in its operation. The term “public interest” however, did not appear in this letter. Rather, the term “public resource” was used in the following manner:

“The .CA domain space is a key public resource, helping to promote the development of electronic commerce in Canada and important to our country’s future social and economic development”.

The term “public resource” was used within a context that suggested that .CA domain names had two important roles to play, which were both in the public interest;

a) economic development through the development of Internet businesses for wealth creation; and

b) social development so Canada could fulfill its aspirations as a society.

Accordingly, even though the term, “public interest” was not expressly used by Industry Canada in confirming CIRA’s mandate, it was nonetheless made clear CIRA was to operate the .CA registry with this combination of public interest priorities in mind; namely economic and social development.

The first express use of the term “public interest” as it relates to CIRA, appeared shortly thereafter. On October 10, 2000, Industry Canada confirmed to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“ICANN”), that CIRA was formally being designated as Canada’s administrator of the .CA registry. In this letter, Industry Canada expressly confirmed that CIRA was to operate in the “public interest”:

This agreement provides that the Government of Canada will designate CIRA to be the new administrator of the .ca and that CIRA will manage the .ca in accordance with principles set by the Government of Canada in the March 11, 1999 letter referred to above and any additional principles that are in the public interest and reasonable. [emphasis added]

The “agreement” referred to by Industry Canada, above, was the “Umbrella Agreement” wherein UBC (the former .CA administrator under the leadership of John Demco), the Government of Canada, and CIRA, agreed on the transition to administration of the .CA registry by CIRA. The Umbrella Agreement expressly made reference to both CIRA being mandated to operate the .CA registry as a “public resource” and in the “public interest”.

The Umbrella Agreement expressly confirmed that the “public interest”, as originally expressed in the Binder Letter, involved both a concern for economic and social development:

“the parties are of the view that the .ca domain space should be developed as a key public resource for social and economic development for all Canadians”. [emphasis added]

The Umbrella Agreement further confirmed that in accordance with Industry Canada’s mandate to CIRA of October 10, 1999:

“CIRA was incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation with the intention of managing the .ca domain space in the public interest”. [emphasis added]

The next appearance of the express use of the term, “public interest”, as it relates to CIRA, appeared in the “Principles for the Delegation and Administration of Country Code Top Level Domain Names”, Presented by ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee on February 23, 2000 (the “GAC Principles”). This document’s objective was to suggest principles that will assist in the development of best practice for the delegation and administration of ccTLDs (country code top-level domain names, such as .CA).

Section 5.1 of the GAC Principles stated:

The relevant government or public authority ultimately represents the interests of the people of the country or territory for which the ccTLD has been delegated. Accordingly, the role of the relevant government or public authority is to ensure that the ccTLD is being administered in the public interest, whilst taking into consideration issues of public policy and relevant law and regulation. [emphasis added]

The GAC Principles also laid out some broader principles that emphasized that while a ccTLD manager such as CIRA has a duty to serve the public interest of its local community, it also has a duty to the global Internet community:

The Internet has evolved from a tool reserved for computer and networking research, to a global medium for commerce, education, and communication. The new realities of the Internet, including its increased importance as a vehicle for national economic growth, and the expanding and more diverse nature of the Internet community necessitated evolution in the traditional means of managing and administering Internet technical functions.

The manager of a ccTLD performs a public service on behalf of the relevant local community and as such the designated manager has a duty to serve this community. The designated manager also has a responsibility to the global Internet community. By ‘global Internet community’ we do not mean any specific legal or international entity, but rather we interpret the term to refer to all of those who are affected by, now or in the future, the operation of the relevant TLD, because such operation may impinge on more than one jurisdiction and affect the interests of individuals and entities from both within the relevant country or territory and elsewhere.

Although this was an ICANN document and an ICANN set of principles, CIRA formally and legally adopted certain of the GAC Principles on November 30, 2000. Then Chair of the CIRA Board, Maureen Cubberley, wrote to Michael Roberts, President of ICANN, and stated that “CIRA supports the framework of the GAC principles as a sound basis for the ongoing relationships concerning the delegation and administration of ccTLDs” and confirmed CIRA’s commitment to administering the .CA registry as a “public resource” in accordance with the Binder Letter.

Accordingly, CIRA’s mandate to operate the .CA registry both as a public resource for economic and social development, and in the public interest, has a well established foundation and history. The question then turns to the myriad of possible applications of these important but very broad principles and to what degree CIRA has followed them.

On October 7, 2009, renowned Internet Law expert, Professor Michael Geist, expressed his concern for what he felt was a “Disappearing Public Interest Mandate”. He noted that “CIRA has not done enough to advance the potential social side of the mandate despite [is] and leaving it to its directors to question whether the social contributions found in leading country-code domains around the world are even part of CIRA’s mandate.” This followed Professor Geist’s previous Blog posting and Toronto Star article wherein he questioned “an unmistakable shift toward prioritizing commercial gain over the public interest”. As examples of this shift, Professor Geist noted a “decision to effectively terminate plans to create an external, public interest body to address “excess” funds”, a decision to “expand CIRA’s registry services to new generic top-level domains”, and “killed a planned submission to the CRTC’s net neutrality hearings”.

In response to Professor Geist, CIRA Chief Executive Office, Byron Holland, disputed Professor Geist’s observations while confirming that “the dot-ca domain is essential to social and economic development within Canada, and we take our mandate of effective stewardship of this key public resource very seriously”. Mr. Holland stated that CIRA “[had] not abandoned plans to actively pursue other public-interest elements of [CIRA’s] mandate”, but noted “[CIRA has] been steadily building [a] reserve but [CIRA] is not quite there yet”.

Mr. Holland also noted that, “CIRA is pursuing additional sources of revenue from other potential registry services to ensure that we have the funds necessary to live up to our stated operational obligations and increased activity in the public interest side of the Canadian domain space.”

Accordingly, what can be seen here, is the struggle to follow both tracks that the Government of Canada mandated CIRA to follow, namely social and economic development, in the public interest. Professor Geist has correctly pointed out that social development in the public interest, is a key component of Canada’s mandate to CIRA, and yet there is scarce evidence that CIRA has embarked on what could be considered an appropriately ambitious course. Professor Geist cites the fact that  “other countries have used their domain name authorities to fund research, engage in public policy, or even grant every citizen the right to a domain name at no cost”, yet Canada appears to have not pursued any of these social development opportunities in any substantial manner.

On the other hand, Mr. Holland correctly points out that in order to fulfill Canada’s mandate to CIRA to engage in social development, CIRA must raise funds from economic development opportunities, including managing CIRA with “reliance on market forces and private sector leadership”, as required in the Binder letter. CIRA cannot of course make any substantial headway into social development projects without adequate resources, and therefore the exploration of revenue generation opportunities is required and closely tied to CIRA’s mandate of social development.

Nevertheless, an election is now underway for the Board of Directors of CIRA, and it is imperative, indeed it is in the public interest, for all concerned to vigorously debate how CIRA can better follow the two tracks of social and economic development mandated by the Government of Canada by seeking and applying all appropriate sources of revenue.

CIRA is in an enviable position of being able to realize reoccurring revenues from its monopoly over .CA registrations. It gets $8.50 year after year, for each .CA registered. CIRA currently has nearly 1.5 million .CA’s registered. By promoting the .CA registry and by increasing access to .CA domain names in a manner consistent with CIRA’s mandate, CIRA could potentially reap millions more on an annual basis that it could, and should, apply to ambitious social and economic development projects. The nature of such projects should be debated and raised in the election with all ideas put on the table, from free domain names for all Canadians, to a special fund for Canadian Internet entrepreneurs.

As someone standing for election for the single public seat available this year on the CIRA Board, I intend to continue to raise these issues in public and would like for others to do the same.

Zak Muscovitch is a Canadian domain name lawyer and his CIRA election web site is zak-for-cira.ca.

(c) 2010 DomainNameNews.com

Advertisement
Upcoming Domain Industry Events, Conferences & Auctions

Guest contributor Zak Muscovitch is a domain name lawyer, based in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He has been practising domain name law for ten years. Go to http://www.DNattorney.com and http://www.muscovitch.com.

Privacy Protection for domainers who have legitimate portfolios is a little like a burka on a bikini model.

Although keeping one’s domain name registration details private is an attractive concept and may even help wary registrants avoid imparting too much information to prospective domain name dispute claimants, in my humble opinion, the practice is a business killer in the .CA realm. As a domain name lawyer I can rarely find out who owns what to try and put together deals. I can’t trace the history of domains to perform due diligence. I can’t identify connections between web sites and domain owners. It stymies me. And if it stymies me from doing .CA deals, that means that it is hurting business for .CA owners , who dont need any more negative factors affecting the Canadian market than they already have. Sure I can sometimes use other methods, but the utility of domaintools.com whois archives is lessening as time goes on, because it carries no new information for most .ca’s since all recent records are privacy protected.

By way of background, CIRA, the Canadian Internet Registration Authority made privacy protection a “default setting” [ed. for individual registrants], and considered this move a leadership position in the Internet world. And I did too. I am a big fan of privacy and thought that CIRA’s privacy protection policy was extraordinarily progressive and consumer-friendly. But I was wrong. It kills business. Imagine a stock exchange where there are no listings….That is what has happened here. And the benefit of privacy is nil for a domainer who is trying to hide, because there a CDRP [ed:.CA Dispute Resolution Policy] reveals your identity anhow….and hiding can actually encourage a CDRP…So it gets you nowhere other than to avoid someone like me finding out what domain name you own so I can easily contact you and know who you are, to make a deal.

In the Canadian .CA realm, domains are extraordinarily underdeveloped so we need all the contact and attention that we can get – not privacy! We dont want a marketplace with hidden vendors. We want a marketplace with vendors showing their wares off in public and making themselves available to bargain with each other.

(c) 2009 DomainNameNews.com

Upcoming Domain Industry Events, Conferences & Auctions