New Bill Threatens Domain Registrants and Poses Risks to Internet Commerce - Page 11 - DNForum - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars

**NameCharger** · 03-07-2008, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gorilla_bob

Does anyone have any press contacts so that we can get this into a more open forum than just the boards?

The spin would be ... "Is Big Business taking over the Internet?"

A tactic for influencing public opinion is to interject ones' position through sound bites. IMO, "Is Big Business taking over the Internet?" is a sound bite that could work against us. Even though it's worded in the form of a question, it plants the seed in the mind of the reader that big business is taking over the Internet and assumes a defeatist position. When dealing with the public it's crucial to be precise in planting the seed for exactly what you want them to believe, eg:

"Anti-phishing bill has hidden agenda against small businesses"

"Bill with anti-phishing label goes behond phishing to hurt small businesses"

"Anti-phishing Bill contains phishy language"

"Anti-phishing Bill is itself phishy -- say critics"

"Anti-phishing Bill goes beyond phishing"

VTEC · 03-08-2008, 04:00 AM

687 more...

**Focus** · 03-08-2008, 04:11 AM

"Snowe Bill puts tens of thousands of Americans at severe risk of major losses"

**Rockefeller** · 03-08-2008, 10:27 AM

Hey guys, i received this email last night from ICA and I wanted to share it with you.

Mr. Godfrey:

I serve as Counsel to the Internet Commerce Association – www.internetcommerce.org . I have cc’d the ICA’s Executive Director, Michael Collins.

I want to thank you for starting the petition against the Snowe bill – you have helped activate a lot of very positive energy against this very negative proposal.

However – and please don’t take this the wrong way – that petition will not be the most effective way to influence Congress on this matter. The reasons for that include:

There is no Congress per se, but 100 Senators and 435 Representatives who mostly only care about their own constituents’’ (voters’) views.
Many of the petition signatories are Anonymous or foreign nationals.
More detailed input matching domainers with their Senators will have much greater effect.

The ICA will be posting information about how US-based individuals concerned about the Snowe bill can most effectively communicate to their Senators, along with a sample letter, at our website this weekend. Michael Collins will let you know when that goes up. We hope that you will let all those who have signed your petition know that their input to Congress needs to be better targeted for maximum effect, and that the ICA has now provided the means for doing so.

Thanks again for all your efforts against the Snowe bill. We hope we can work cooperatively with you on this matter in the weeks ahead.

Very best regards,

Philip S. Corwin

"Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey

**DotComGod** · 03-08-2008, 10:54 AM

I can tell you I have known Philip Corwin for almost 2 years now and he is a class act that knows exactly what he is doing.

-=DCG=-

**Rockefeller** · 03-08-2008, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DotComGod

I can tell you I have known Philip Corwin for almost 2 years now and he is a class act that knows exactly what he is doing.

-=DCG=-

Great to have him on our side. I'll keep you guys updated.

**clasione** · 03-09-2008, 10:05 AM

I just drafted two polite, respectful, but informative letters to both New York Senators asking to not cosponsor the bill..... Hopefully we all will make a difference and our voices will be heard.

**DaddyHalbucks** · 03-09-2008, 01:05 PM

Here's what I posted on the Senator's blog:

If you are concerned about false WhoIs information, ICANN already prohibits it! Enforce the existing ICANN rules!! Get ICANN to actually do something besides shilling for Network Solutions. This bill is horrible and severely threatens small business. It is an asset grab for big corporations masquerading as a consumer protection act. Federal law is already very strict on trademark protection. Trademarks do not need to be expanded. The way the bill is written, it tilts everything in favor of big business. This bill needs to be re-worked to focus on anti-fraud and anti-phishing. Get rid of the domain asset grab for big corporations. The bill as introduced is a nightmare for small entities.

**Rockefeller** · 03-09-2008, 01:56 PM

I got an email from ICA this morning, they wanted me to direct everyone here:

http://www.internetcommerce.org/OPPOSE_THE_SNOWE_BILL

**skylark** · 03-10-2008, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockefeller

I got an email from ICA this morning, they wanted me to direct everyone here:

http://www..internetcommerce.org/OPPOSE_THE_SNOWE_BILL

Use below link instead (previously posted link has the - www followed by spaces )

http://www.internetcommerce.org/OPPOSE_THE_SNOWE_BILL

**DaddyHalbucks** · 03-10-2008, 12:15 PM

I had to laugh at one of the comments on the Senator's blog. It said something to the effect that the bill would "decimate the domain industry." LOL. Who cares? As far as the Senator knows, the domain industry IS cybersquatters.

That is not the way to win the war.

The way to win this war is to talk about how the bill threatens legitimate small business. Lawmakers can understand that.

**DomeBase** · 03-12-2008, 12:30 AM

(moved)

**DaddyHalbucks** · 03-12-2008, 10:20 PM

Has attorney John Berryhill commented on this yet?

?

**bwhhisc** · 03-12-2008, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

I had to laugh at one of the comments on the Senator's blog. It said something to the effect that the bill would "decimate the domain industry." LOL. Who cares? As far as the Senator knows, the domain industry IS cybersquatters.
That is not the way to win the war.
The way to win this war is to talk about how the bill threatens legitimate small business. Lawmakers can understand that.

GOOD COMMENT, you hit the nail right on the head. I started my letters to our Senators as follows:

Dear Senator _________:
I am writing as a small business owner in South Carolina who is also a professional website and domain developer. I wish to express my strong concern and opposition to S. 2661, the “Anti-Phishing Consumer Protection Act”, introduced by Senator Snowe on February 25, 2008 and referred to the Commerce Committee.

I closed with a list of a half dozen of our active business websites....

**WebsiteTraders.Com** · 03-13-2008, 06:15 AM

i would like to contribute guys with watever capabilities i have not coz we are domainers but coz this bill is against human ethics. wat i can see is there is a lot of ambiguity as to the tm owners and their corrosponding website they want to own. wat they are saying is.....we want the dot coms n dot nets coz they r similar to our name.........ok agreed they r similar.....but we can tell the senators if this is when we registered our domains we werent told that u would have to give up ur name if it matches someone elses TM,
so now if they want to make that clause n clear things for once and for all....we can prove all the money, time n effort that has gone in bringing those unregistered plots to todays rates.......n hence if ever they want to buy any corrosponding website to their name........pay up all the efforts gone into it.......n then take it........give the market price to the domain owner....eg. if one co. needs say abc.com.......let him pay the owner xxxxxx or xxxxxxx, we just need to justify this value.......how can they take it for reg price.......coz tomorrow if someone has his business name as FUND CONSULTANTS with tm, do they mean to say he can pay a lawyer n get fund.com for reg fee, thats neither rational nor acceptable any ethics, what they mean i feel from wat i have read is corps should b given the domains since they got money......ok domainers r no broke, we can give the senators money n once n for all remove this ambiguity n ask them to state a straight clause that no corp from now on can claim any domain unless they can prove that the domain owner is using their business name and selling things directly using their name......else no further requests from corps will b entertained

**draggar** · 03-13-2008, 06:35 AM

Side note: How the hell did John Sununu get on a committee?

Back on topic: I see the above mentioned is on the committee. I'm from NH and he was my governor when I lived there (well, part of the time). I've started emailing people I know up in NH to get them to shoot him down, I'll have to dig out some old contacts, too, to see if I still have any connections in Concord (the capital).

**sashas** · 03-13-2008, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwhhisc

GOOD COMMENT, you hit the nail right on the head. I started my letters to our Senators as follows:

Dear Senator _________:
I am writing as a small business owner in South Carolina who is also a professional website and domain developer. I wish to express my strong concern and opposition to S. 2661, the “Anti-Phishing Consumer Protection Act”, introduced by Senator Snowe on February 25, 2008 and referred to the Commerce Committee.

I closed with a list of a half dozen of our active business websites....

I think this is a very good strategy. Actually listing your active websites to make them understand that you, as a small business owner, depend on the internet for your livelihood, and that there are thousands others like you.

So guys, when you write your letters, actually mention a few of your existing sites...just make sure they're not parked pages

**WebsiteTraders.Com** · 03-22-2008, 01:57 PM

Does anyone out here know when is the snow bill coming up for decision?

**Soccerplayur012** · 03-22-2008, 10:51 PM

I'm thinking about giving a phone call to Indiana Senator Evan Bayh (old family friend) to make sure he votes in favor of us domainers.