Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 44: Line 44:     
In August, 2012, a mixed ruling by the Central District of California District Court accepted only 2 out of ICANN and ICM's 7 motions to dismiss. The court ruled that ICANN would be subject to anti-trust law, as ICM pays fees to them in order to be permitted to run the .xxx domain space, and that the trial would proceed with focus on the "defensive registrations" market.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10149-court-rules-youporn-can-sue-icann-for-alleged-xxx-antitrust-violations Court rules YouPorn can sue ICANN for alleged .xxx antitrust violations, domainincite.com]</ref>
 
In August, 2012, a mixed ruling by the Central District of California District Court accepted only 2 out of ICANN and ICM's 7 motions to dismiss. The court ruled that ICANN would be subject to anti-trust law, as ICM pays fees to them in order to be permitted to run the .xxx domain space, and that the trial would proceed with focus on the "defensive registrations" market.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10149-court-rules-youporn-can-sue-icann-for-alleged-xxx-antitrust-violations Court rules YouPorn can sue ICANN for alleged .xxx antitrust violations, domainincite.com]</ref>
 +
 +
In October, 2012, ICM filed a counter-suit against Manwin. The company alleged that Manwin has cost them at least $120 million in damages by using its adult industry market power to convince other companies not to do business with the .xxx TLD.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10653-icm-files-120m-lawsuit-over-manwins-xxx-boycott ICM files $120m lawsuit over Manwin’s .xxx “boycott”, domainincite.com]</ref>
    
===UDRP===
 
===UDRP===
14,326

edits

Navigation menu