Dentro del boletín que recibí destaco lo que puse en el titulo.
The Public Interest Registry (”PIR”), the company which runs the .Org registry, announced a Domain “Anti-Abuse Policy”, effective 5 February 2009.

In announcing this policy PIR is taking a strong stand against what is defines as Domain Abuse and it gives itself the right to cancel, any .org, domain registration which is considered to be abusive.

From the announcement:

“”"”Abusive use(s) of .ORG domain names should not be tolerated. The nature of such abuses creates security and stability issues for the registry, registrars and registrants, as well as for users of the Internet in general.

The PIR defines abusive use of a domain as the wrong or excessive use of power, position or ability, and includes, without limitation, the following:

· Illegal or fraudulent actions;

· Spam: The use of electronic messaging systems to send unsolicited bulk messages. The term applies to e-mail spam and similar abuses such as instant messaging spam, mobile messaging spam, and the spamming of Web sites and Internet forums. An example, for purposes of illustration, would be the use of email in denial-of-service attacks;

· Phishing: The use of counterfeit Web pages that are designed to trick recipients into divulging sensitive data such as usernames, passwords, or financial data;

· Pharming: The redirecting of unknowing users to fraudulent sites or services, typically through DNS hijacking or poisoning;

· Willful distribution of malware: The dissemination of software designed to infiltrate or damage a computer system without the owner’s informed consent.
Examples include, without limitation, computer viruses, worms, keyloggers, and trojan horses;

· Fast flux hosting: Use of fast-flux techniques to disguise the location of Web sites or other Internet services, or to avoid detection and mitigation efforts, or to host illegal activities. Fast-flux techniques use DNS to frequently change the location on the Internet to which the domain name of an Internet host or name server resolves. Fast flux hosting may be used only with prior permission of PIR;

· Botnet command and control: Services run on a domain name that are used to control a collection of compromised computers or “zombies,” or to direct denial-of-service attacks (DDoS attacks);

· Distribution of child pornography; and

· Illegal Access to Other Computers or Networks: Illegally accessing computers, accounts, or networks belonging to another party, or attempting to penetrate security measures of another individual’s system (often known as “hacking”). Also, any activity that might be used as a precursor to an attempted system penetration (e.g., port scan, stealth scan, or other information gathering activity).

PIR reserves the right to deny, cancel or transfer any registration or transaction, or place any domain name(s) on registry lock, hold or similar status, that it deems necessary, in its discretion; (1) to protect the integrity and stability of the registry; (2) to comply with any applicable laws, government rules or requirements, requests of law enforcement, or any dispute resolution process; (3) to avoid any liability, civil or criminal, on the part of PIR, as well as its affiliates, subsidiaries, officers, directors, and employees; (4) per the terms of the registration agreement or (5) to correct mistakes made by PIR or any Registrar in connection with a domain name registration.

PIR also reserves the right to place upon registry lock, hold or similar status a domain name during resolution of a dispute.”"”

Let’s Hope this policy curbs abuses but that the registry does not cancel any “innocent” domains.

As 2008 closes, we at the .ORG registry took note of some of the
major events and news that shaped our industry and fueled our
discussions. This made for a very historic year and bears the seeds
of future changes for the domain name industry.

The “Kaminsky Bug” and DNSSEC

In August Dan Kaminsky unveiled the flaw that leaves a “gaping
hole” in the Domain Name System (DNS) [1]. The coverage of
Kaminsky’s bug proved many early advocates and pioneers right.
DNSSEC is the best fix and a needed upgrade to the DNS
infrastructure.

Much credit belongs to the Swedish country code domain, .SE, the
first to implement DNSSEC [2] and to Nominet (the registry for
.UK) who championed the need for it before we announced as the first
gTLD to start implementation. [3]

What came to be termed as the “Kaminsky bug” changed the
debate on DNSSEC from “Do we really need DNSSEC?” to “How do we
implement DNSSEC”?

Expansion and introduction of new Top-Level Domains (TLDs)

In June, ICANN announced [4] the process for expansion of new
gTLDs. Note that there will most likely be a few gTLDs that make
sense by truly serving the end-user need, perhaps via an innovative
application. But, user confusion will result from a flood of new
gTLDs which serve no discernable purpose. Most internet users will
not immediately be aware of new TLDs, and even if and when they
become aware, they will not be able to correctly remember the site
address. So very likely they will simply defer to the search
engine. Browser manufacturers are already figuring this out and are
incorporating search function right into the address bar [5], like
Google Chrome undermining the categorization that exists because of
the TLDs.

If address bar and search functions are merging and if users
increasingly use search engines rather than direct navigation to
resolve to a site, how relevant will TLD designations be? Probably
far less than today.

And what about the variety and choice the spammers, phishers and
distributors of malware will now have in terms of new TLDs to
target? This doesn’t even begin to touch on the impact on
brands and trademark holders who will have to spend even more money
protecting their brands and registering them in hundreds of sunrise
periods. And lastly, where is the data that the end-user in facts
wants upwards of hundreds of new TLD to help them navigate? On
December 18, NTIA posted a comprehensive set of comments [6] to
ICANN’s proposal which effectively halt the current plan and
timetable due to some of these same concerns and lack of research.
We believe these comments point out the needed due diligence before
moving forward.

Lines between Registries and Registrars starting to fade.

ICANN also made public the much anticipated CRAI report [7]. The
distinct lines of separation between registries and registrars will
blur as a select few registrars will try their hand at the registry
business. Bottom-line: we believe ICANN’s policy should bar
cross ownership of registries and registrars (except in some limited
cases for small private TLDs). There are just too many opportunities
for anti-competitive behavior if registrars own registries and give
their captive registries special treatment. If not, then ICANN
should make any new ownership policy equally applicable to registries
and registrars.

Industry Leaders “Stepping up to the plate”

In 2008, we started initiatives such as the DNSSEC Industry
Coalition [8] and the Registry Internet Safety Group (RISG) [9] and
helped form the Arabic Script IDN Working Group [10]. The credit
goes to the members of these groups who have volunteered to work
together and donated experts and time to delve into problems that
affect each and every Internet user today. The problems range from
how to thwart phishing and malware and how to streamline DNSSEC
implementation across multiple registries to how to enable Arabic
IDNs to work across multiple languages and registries. The end
user benefits most of all, and we believe collaboration is the wave
of the future in these efforts.

ICANN shuts bad actor registrars.

After a few highly publicized episodes of bad actor domain
registrars, and much criticism of slow response, ICANN moved to
terminate the accreditation [11]of an especially egregious registrar
EstDomains effective November 24th. Let’s hope the next ones
will also be swiftly terminated. Registrars with questionable
practices erode customer trust and are bad for everyone’s business.

Domain Tasting Plunges

In the past few years our industry has experienced something of a
boom, not unlike the real estate market, complete with speculation, a
robust secondary market and rapid fire growth. 2008 was the year of
the recession, initiated ironically enough with the real estate
market. The 20% to 30% hyper growth is no more. Was the end to
the hypergrowth due just to the recession?

Top two in my mind are the changes in the Google Ad sense model as
well as the end of domain tasting. PIR, it must be noted, was the
first registry to enact an Excess Deletion Fee for domain tasting.
The net result for us was a much more stable base. But –pardon
the pun– the “distaste” for domain tasting spread far enough
for ICANN to enact limits on the Add Grace Period (AGP - the source
of the problem). [12]These factors most likely led to the slowdown
in growth of domain names in 2008.

Governments push for their own Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs)

Push has been coming from governments who want an IDN of their own
sooner rather than later. The Internet is the great frontier, and
IDNs are certainly valuable when used to enable people to express
their names and hence desired addresses as their language and script
intended and not as a transliteration of English. The worrisome
notion comes when the urgency for IDNs are bound and rolled into
highly nationalistic sentiments which more often divide than unite.

Godaddy is the undisputed market leader among registrars

Godaddy claims to have registered over 32 million domains, It is no
secret that they are a smart and innovative marketing machine. For
their competitors, they are a formidable force to beat on the retail
game, leaving them to ponder the cost of competing head-on.

Gambling and the Kentucky Domains

A recent law suit in Kentucky has attracted world-wide attention
because it could create a very dangerous precedent – the
application of local law to the domain name system and Internet web
sites that are available globally. Even though the Kentucky case only
involves Kentucky gambling laws, the dangerous precedent is that
regimes around the world with oppressive local laws restricting
speech or religion might attempt similar litigation.

So there you have it, a reflection on the peaks and valleys of the
domain name industry in 2008. We look forward to an amazing 2009
and the interesting and entertaining news to come. We welcome your
comments!

Fuentes: thedomains.com y Boletín llegado a mi casilla de correo@Domainer

Eso mismo iba a decir yo... de seguro veras a los sitios warez usando apartir de ahora dominios de paises en los cuales se sientan mas seguro, porque valiendose de esto es seguro que las empresas de softwares que se vean afectada por pirateria lo primera que haran sera contactarse con la PIR y presentar quejas ahi. Les saldria mucho mas barato y menos esfuerzo y lo mejor., resuelven el problema de raiz practicamente tumbando el sitio.

Imagina que tu competencia manda algunos spams a tu nombre o linkeados a tu .ORG. y te cancelan el dominio.
jejeje se complica NO?