Line 27: |
Line 27: |
| | | |
| ===Lifestyle Domain Holdings, Inc.=== | | ===Lifestyle Domain Holdings, Inc.=== |
− | The application from [[Lifestyle Domain Holdings, Inc.]] was issued a [[GAC]] Early Warning from the representative of Australia and GAC Chair, [[Heather Dryden]]. The warning system is noted as a strong recommendation on behalf of national governments to the [[ICANN Board]] that a given TLD application should be denied as it stands. Applicants are encouraged to work with objecting GAC members.<ref>[http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/gac-early-warning GAC Early Warning, NewgTLDS.ICANN.org] Retrieved 25 Nov 2012</ref>
| + | In November 2012, the application from [[Lifestyle Domain Holdings, Inc.]] was issued a [[GAC]] Early Warning from the representative of Australia and the GAC Chair at the time, [[Heather Dryden]]. The warning system is noted as a strong recommendation on behalf of national governments to the [[ICANN Board]] that a given TLD application should be denied as it stands. Applicants are encouraged to work with objecting GAC members.<ref>[http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/gac-early-warning GAC Early Warning, NewgTLDS.ICANN.org] Retrieved 25 Nov 2012</ref> |
| | | |
| The warning states that the applicant is "seeking exclusive access to a common generic string .. that relates to a broad market sector," which Ms. Dryden notes could have unintended consequences and a negative impact on competition.<ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/Food-AU-50608.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1353427150000 Food AU, GACweb.ICANN.org]</ref> | | The warning states that the applicant is "seeking exclusive access to a common generic string .. that relates to a broad market sector," which Ms. Dryden notes could have unintended consequences and a negative impact on competition.<ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/Food-AU-50608.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1353427150000 Food AU, GACweb.ICANN.org]</ref> |
Line 40: |
Line 40: |
| | | |
| ==Prior Controversy== | | ==Prior Controversy== |
− | In June 2009, celebrity chef '''Wolfgang Puck''' announced his plans to apply for the .food TLD in partnership with [[Minds + Machines]] during the ICANN meeting in Sydney, Australia. Puck's primary responsibility in the partnership was to encourage entities within the food industry to use the .food TLD. <ref>[http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2009/06/23/wolfgang-puck-wants-to-own-food/ Wolfgang Puck Wants to Serve .food, Blogs.WSJ.com]</ref> The partnership's application for the string did not materialize and ended in a lawsuit. Minds + Machines, together with its parent company [[Top Level Domains Holding Ltd.]] and its investor '''Frederick Krueger''', filed a lawsuit against Puck and his wife Gelila Puck as a result of a failed business deal in connection with the .food TLD. The consulting firm alleged that Gelila interjected herself in the relationship between Minds+Machines and Wolfgang Puck and interfered in the existing business relationships with Minds + Machines. The company also alleged that the Pucks sent a demand letter citing that they own 50% of the .food and 50% of all the business that will be developed as a result of their introductions. In addition, the couple also allegedly stated that they have the right to co-invest in any TLDs. Minds + Machines refused the couples demands. Gelila became "forceful, abusive, and erratic" to the point of calling Minds + Machines employees and telling them to resign. Wolfgang also stopped promoting the .food TLD. Minds + Machines asked the court to order the Pucks to pay $5 million for business damages. The Pucks argued that the company breached their contract and requested an immediate negotiation. <ref>[http://www.eatmedaily.com/documents/puck1.pdf Minds + Machines vs. Wolfgang & Gelila Puck]</ref> | + | In June 2009, celebrity chef '''Wolfgang Puck''' announced his plans to apply for the .food TLD in partnership with [[Minds + Machines]] during the ICANN meeting in Sydney, Australia. Puck's primary responsibility in the partnership was to encourage entities within the food industry to use the .food TLD. <ref>[http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2009/06/23/wolfgang-puck-wants-to-own-food/ Wolfgang Puck Wants to Serve .food, Blogs.WSJ.com]</ref> The partnership's application for the string did not materialize and ended in a lawsuit. Minds + Machines, together with its parent company [[Top Level Domain Holdings Ltd.]] and its investor '''Frederick Krueger''', filed a lawsuit against Puck and his wife Gelila Puck as a result of a failed business deal in connection with the .food TLD. The consulting firm alleged that Gelila interjected herself in the relationship between Minds+Machines and Wolfgang Puck and interfered in the existing business relationships with Minds + Machines. The company also alleged that the Pucks sent a demand letter citing that they own 50% of the .food and 50% of all the business that will be developed as a result of their introductions. In addition, the couple also allegedly stated that they have the right to co-invest in any TLDs. Minds + Machines refused the couples demands. Gelila became "forceful, abusive, and erratic" to the point of calling Minds + Machines employees and telling them to resign. Wolfgang also stopped promoting the .food TLD. Minds + Machines asked the court to order the Pucks to pay $5 million for business damages. The Pucks argued that the company breached their contract and requested an immediate negotiation. <ref>[http://www.eatmedaily.com/documents/puck1.pdf Minds + Machines vs. Wolfgang & Gelila Puck]</ref> |
| | | |
| On October 28, 2009, the court dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice and without cost to any party and requested that both parties settled their differences.<ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/puck-machines.pdf STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF ALL CLAIMS]</ref> | | On October 28, 2009, the court dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice and without cost to any party and requested that both parties settled their differences.<ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/puck-machines.pdf STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF ALL CLAIMS]</ref> |
Line 48: |
Line 48: |
| | | |
| | | |
− | __NOTOC__
| + | __FORCETOC__ |
| | | |
| [[Category:TLD]] | | [[Category:TLD]] |
| [[Category:Food & Drink New gTLDs|cafe]] | | [[Category:Food & Drink New gTLDs|cafe]] |