Mike,
There was no blowing of smoke (or sunshine for that matter) with regard to ICM Registry?s stance on cybersquatting. We have been quite diligent in enforcing our documented policies (
http://icm.xxx/policies/ please see specifically the top links for Domain Name Dispute Resolution) when circumstances have proven patterns of widespread or serial registrations with ill intent. You can read about that here.
http://www.thedomains.com/2011/12/13...ngtonpost-xxx/
With regard to XBIZ particularly, they did not apply to register xbiz.xxx in any of the pre-launch periods, (sunrise, founders, or landrush) and are more than welcome to file for RES, (the Rapid Evaluation Service that we have been highly commended for, and the National Arbitration Forum has published stats for just yesterday that you can see here
http://www.adrforum.com/newsroom.aspx?itemID=1709 which show takedowns take an average of two days) CEDRP or UDRP.
While we understand that this situation mat be not ideal for XBIZ, this registrant does not appear to have engaged in serial cybersquatting, and for all we know may have some legitimate rights in the name (as others clearly have). We cannot take unilateral action, without due process in this circumstance under our own cybersquatting policies. The rules are there, and we must abide by them too.
For the record, (as I?ve said here before) XBIZ will not take our advertising. (Which is a shame, really ? because we would love the opportunity to work with them to deliver relevant, clear and factual information about our company and our product.)
Oh ? and by the way, you?ll be more than welcome to apply for mikesouth.xxx the moment we roll out the performer program. You can see that it?s clearly part of the program by looking at the Registrant Name section of the whois for that domain. Any and every name that is currently being held in a performer escrow account was placed there to ensure that the only people that had the ability to register those names, were, in fact, the performer/professional listed.