Quote:
Originally Posted by Keyword Factory  The ICA represents a few people/companies who fund them. Specifically, their current main goal is to protect the rights of companies like SEDO to put infrining keywords on their parking pages. The IREIT people set up ICA and now that IREIT got sued the ICA is trying to distance themselves from them. Now these big players are trying to get small domain owners to fund their lobbying by using scare tactics. There is no reason to believe that ICA protects the rights of "all domainers" or that they are some kind of industry "watchdog." Mr, Corwin is a long-time Washingon lobbyists that will support whomever is paying.
The ICA is going to do overall damage to the domain industry. In you read the current issue of Modern Domainer you will read how the ICA was pegged for having a code of conduct that is not followed by their members or enforced.
So has the ICA given any advice to domainers about how to operate in a changing landscape? Such as develop your sites and obtain your own trade rights? All I see are scare tactics and doom and gloom scenarios to scare people in sending them money. Of course it is your money, if you want to use it to support SEDO, Frank Schilling, etc. then go ahead. I am sure they need your money. |
Hi,
Yes, iReit was instrumental in forming ICA. However, they decided to end their association with ICA during the time that they were going through some management changes last year. It was probably best for ICA that they left. We receive a significant amount of our support from a few service companies in the industry and from some large portfolio holders. However, I am in communications with the board members almost every day and they are sincerely concerned for domain investors and developers at all financial levels. ICA's tiered membership fees are meant to encourage people and companies of greater means to provide greater support for an association that lobbies to protect all domainers. It seems to be working to me. We would not be able to do the work that we do in Washington now without the big players funding.
I have not seen the Modern Domainer article, so cannot speak to that issue. However, no one has brought a charge of violation of our code of conduct to my attention. Yesterday, we implemented a new policy aimed at making members more accountable to our Code of Conduct. Our membership list is now published at
https://www.internetcommerce.org/sponsors
We have devoted most of our energy since Snowe S.2661 was introduced to rallying opposition in Washington to this bill. This bill threatens large and small domain owners including those with developed domains. I might add that it is the small domainers that are probably least able defend themselves against actions under this "anti-phishing bill". Frank Schilling or Sedo can probably afford a few hundred thousand dollars to mount a defense for themselves. We have made great progress in Washington and I will include a report about the progress in our next newsletter.
ICA is still in its infancy. We have made some missteps as we got started and will probably make others, but I am trying to organize some work groups to help develop more effective programs and policies. The first work group is for marketing and fundraising which will consider membership prices. Others will follow for website improvement, conference organization, communication and more. I hope that you will join and support ICA now, but if you are not convinced that we are working for the benefit of all domainers (except those who purposely target trademarks), then at least watch what we accomplish before disparaging our intentions. Thank you.