No Straight Answers From ICM Registry (DotXXX)
I went to the ICMRegistry website to view their policies and terms. Below are screenshots of the steps I took which brought me to their TOS (Terms Of Service) page:
On their hompage (http://www.icmregistry.com), I clicked on the link on the very bottom of the page (often where the legal links can be found) and clicked on Policies & Legal Agreements, as shown below:
It lead me to this page, categorizing all of their policies and below that, legal agreements.
I clicked on Website Terms Of Service:
It brought me to this page, which states their terms. I screenshotted the important part (which I also highlighted) and the paragraph following that one, to show which part has me most concerned.
As a performer, this is not something, if I’m understanding it correctly, that I would want to sign. Does this mean they have the legal right to sell our content, or am I completely reading this wrong? Their so-called “ICM owned sites” wouldn’t apply to my .XXX domain? Correct? Well, then why did they keep beating around the bush on that question I repeatedly asked?
Here’s the conversation I had with them on Twitter on december 8th, 2011
Finally, an answer, but it came from Directnic (the domain sellers), not from ICMRegistry!
I have a major problem with this TOS if it grants them permission, as the wording so loosely implies, to copy and use my content. If this is just legal hogwash, standard ole mumbo jumbo, then what worries me is .. it sure as hell looks like something that would hold up in court in a dispute over intellectual property rights if I were to attempt to sue for breach of contract, theft, etc. I’m no lawyer, so I can’t really dissect this and make absolute legal sense of it.
What’s your opinion/professional advice on this? What can they do with our content, legally and get away with, at absolute worst, according to this contract? Some legal advice would be great. The TOS I’m referring to can be found right here http://icmregistry.com/policies/terms-of-service/
ElliotNess29, 
amanda36c 
Dot XXX (@dotXXX) 2:56 pm on December 12, 2011 Permalink |
Amanda,
We have attempted to explain this to you very directly and with straight answers; as well as asked you via direct message to email us or legal@icmregistry.com with questions.
You are confusing the WEBSITE Terms of Service with the REGISTRY-REGISTRANT Agreement which is located here: http://icmregistry.com/policies/registry-registrant-agreement/ which apply to websites built and developed on a .XXX domain name. The WEBSITE Terms of Service apply to our website and any content submitted there. So by example, if you submitted a question or comment to the site we have the right to publish that question to the general public in something like our Frequently Asked Questions support area.
DirectNIC answered the exact same way; referring to the Registry-Registrant Agreement.
If you have further questions or have other concerns please let us know and we will try and assist you.
Thank you.
LikeLike
amanda36c 9:48 pm on December 12, 2011 Permalink |
Dear ICM,
I’m impressed with the promptness of your team’s reply with regards to this. I hadn’t even announced this blog entry prior to the time of your reply to it. In fact, I was going to wait to post it this afternoon. In any case, allow me to stress a few key points.
I am not confused. I am clearly capable of differentiating between your Registry/Registrant Agreement and your Website Terms Of Service (TOS). I was getting nowhere with my questions to you about the TOS, so I never got as far as to pursue the Registry/Registrant Agreement, but I did want to know why the TOS exists on a page that it doesn’t apply to and even after an inquiry into this, still remains unclear as to why it’s there.
You told me to contact your legal department with my questions. Why? If you could just answer a few simple questions, there would be no need to sick me on your lawyers. All I wanted to know was why that TOS looked like it applied to me, as a potential buyer of a dot XXX site. Why wouldn’t it apply to me? After all, the link to it falls under the Policies page, which also holds the link to our Registry/Registrant Agreement, that we are bound by. Why wouldn’t I think that the TOS apllied to me, as well, considering where you have placed it? That TOS is something I would never agree to, the way it is written, so this is a major concern for me.
Why I won’t contact your lawyers is simple. There are two of them sitting on the IFFOR that used to work for iFriends/Webpower. Sheri Falco was the Assistant General Counsel for iFriends (Webpower Inc.) and is now on the IFFOR, creating policies for ICM and who also happens to be the General Counsel for ICM. Andrew Kayton, who is currently iFriends (Webpower Inc.)’s General Counsel is also a member of the IFFOR.
My problem with this is that I worked on iFriends/Webpower as a performer for 10 years and left over a revenue dispute, after discovering discrepancies all over the reports. The more I asked, the more elusive iFriends became. It got to the point where they, just like you, decided to send me off to the lawyers – those very same lawyers! Small world, huh?
So, basically, with all the trouble I had with iFriends/Webpower, you expect me to trust anything your lawyers have to say, knowing full well who they are? Kayton represents a company that has 423 reports filed against them on this one site, Ripoffreport.com http://www.ripoffreport.com/Search/ifriends.aspx along with plenty of others from smaller-known scam/fraud reporting websites. You’ll have to excuse my absence of trust in your General Counsel, but I have no reason to believe any of you. I believe what I see. Why is the TOS even there, on the dot XXX information pages if it doesn’t apply to them?
Amanda (amanda36c)
LikeLike
KW 4:02 pm on December 12, 2011 Permalink |
Visit http://iffor.org/policies.html . IFFOR makes the rules that apply to all dotxxx domains.
IFFOR requires dotxxx owners to allow them to scan their site for signs that the dotxxx site owner violated the IFFOR policies.
If you prevent them from scanning your site (like when a part of your site is a member area that is password protected), you risk loosing your dotxxx domain.
It gets worse. IFFOR can change those policies. Who’s to say they won’t change the rules in favor of ICMregistry? What if ICMregistry decides they want to make more money and uses IFFOR to ban CCBILL from dotxxx sites in favor of the ICMregistrys own credit card processing system?
LikeLike
Dot XXX (@dotXXX) 3:04 pm on December 13, 2011 Permalink |
Amanda,
Content submitted directly to the ICMRegistry.com website, like support questions, is specifically what is being addressed in the WEBSITE Terms of Service. The Registry-Registrant Agreement is applicable to .XXX domains you register and operate. You would not, nor could you, submit your website or it’s content to ICMRegistry.com, therefore the website Terms of Service you are concerned about would not apply to that content or website.
Hopefully this is becoming clearer.
Thanks.
LikeLike
amanda36c 9:32 pm on December 13, 2011 Permalink |
What is your name? I’d like to know who I am corresponding with, before I continue.
LikeLike
ElliotNess29 4:24 pm on December 14, 2011 Permalink |
I am not a lawyer nor do I claim to be one. I find this TOS to be very vague in nature compared with other sites who are used for information only purposes. This TOS fails to name exactly what sites (ie. http://www.icmregistry.com) it actually applies to. It is noteworthy to inform all those who are going to purchase or have purchased a DOTXXX domain that there was no TOS on the ICM Registry website during the Founders Program in February 2011. This TOS only appears on ICM Registry’s site in July 2011 with the privacy policy and there was no other legal agreements at that time. I have starred * the wording that is odd in nature to this TOS:
These Terms of Service (“TOS”), which govern your use of the web sites operated by ICM Registry LLC (“ICM” or the “Registry”) and *any associated functionality*, along with any supplemental terms provided to you in connection with specific website features (collectively, “ICM Sites”) *offered*, owned, or operated by ICM Registry LLC is a contract between you and ICM, and its parents, successors, subsidiaries, and affiliates. By using ICM Sites you are agreeing to be bound by and comply with this TOS and the ICM Privacy Policy that is incorporated by reference in this TOS.
I can see why people would be confused when reading this TOS which is situated right under the Registry/Registrant agreement not off with the privacy policy as it looks like it pertains to this agreement. One would expect it to apply with the registry/registrant agreement as ICM Registry will be providing services such as piracy protection, virus, malware scanning and verification of 18+ payment process to the DOTXXX domains as per policies set by the IFFOR. This TOS is very all-encompassing for just an information Q & A site and items that would be put in their FAQ. I starred * the parts that seem to be overboard and I have not yet found any other sites with this clause in their TOSs:
You are responsible for any content you post to ICM Sites, including, without limitation, any personal information contained in your posts, and for any harm resulting from such posting.
Except as otherwise provided in this TOS, you or the owner of any content that you post to ICM Sites retain ownership of all rights, title, and interests in that content.
However, by posting content on a Service, you grant us and our assigns, agents, and licensees the irrevocable, royalty free, perpetual, worldwide right and license to use, *reproduce, modify, display, remix, perform, distribute, redistribute, adapt, promote, create derivative works, and syndicate this content in any medium and through any form of technology or distribution*. We own all rights, title, and interests in any compilation, collective work or other derivative work created by us using or incorporating your content (but not your original content).
This part of the TOS I have not yet found anywhere in other general websites that I have checked:
*When you use a Site feature that allows users to share, transform, readapt, modify, or combine user content with other content, you grant us and our users an irrevocable, non-exclusive, royalty free, perpetual, worldwide right and license to use, reproduce, modify, display, remix, perform, distribute, redistribute, adapt, promote, create derivative works, and syndicate your content in any medium and through any form of technology or distribution and to permit any derivative works to be licensed under these same license terms.*
The above parts of the ICM Registry’s TOS should be very worrisome to any DOTXXX domain purchaser as the ICM can change anything regarding DOTXXX agreements and this TOS at their discretion.This next part of the TOS makes me believe that it does in fact apply or could be applied at a future date by ICM Regisrty to the Registry/registrant agreement. Again, I am not a lawyer. I have starred* the parts that lead me to this conclusion.
General Legal Terms
This TOS along with any supplemental terms or policies posted on the Sites constitutes the whole legal agreement between you and ICM regarding your use of ICM Sites. *This TOS does not replace, modify, or limit in any way any contract or agreement between you and ICM with respect to reservation or registration of a Domain Name in the .XXX TLD or your status as a member of the Sponsored Community for the .XXX TLD, including, without limitation, the Registry/Registrant Agreement.*
We may modify this TOS from time to time. If you do not agree to the changes, stop using ICM Sites and cancel any fee-based ICM Sites before the changes take effect. Your use of a Service after the effective date of any changes means that you agree to the changes.
If a court of law finds that any provision of this TOS is invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will continue to be valid and enforceable.
*We may assign this contract at any time without notice to you*.You may not assign this contact to anyone else.
Amanda has clearly pointed out the association between ICM Registry and Webpower Inc./Ifriends/Clickcash as well as the lawyers involved with both companies. Webpower/Ifriends has the most complaints (423 complaints on Ripoff report alone and growing) from Customers, Affiliates and performers than any other Adult Webcam site. It is also noteworthy that Webpower Inc/Ifriends was also part of the Founders Program when its registration end in February 2011 and no TOS was present on the ICM Registry site at that time. The fact that ICM Registry has put this company, Webpower/Ifriends out as their first Adult website to the public should have all companies or performers or webmasters questioning the integrity and due dilligence of the ICM Registry.
ICM Registry is in complete control of the DOTXXX domains, the agreement, the TOS, and the IFFOR so who is going to stop them from making any changes to the rules at their discretion which has been granted by the purchasers of the .XXX domains? Something just isn’t right with the show being put on by the ICM Registry. Just my opinion but if you dress up a pig, put make-up on it and a wig, it is still really just a pig!
LikeLike
D Man 5:03 pm on December 14, 2011 Permalink |
Yep pretty clearly you’re not a lawyer; or even have a clue what you’re talking about. It took me all of 5 seconds to find nearly the exact same wording on Yahoo’s Terms of Service here: http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/utos-173.html
Pointing out when they applied a TOS to their website is completely irrelevant; nor is any information about iFriends or anyone who works or worked for them. You’re not even right casting.xxx was the first site announced by .xxx… I know you’re just trying to talk to girls but bother to do some research.
Amanda there’s nothing wrong with that TOS; it’s for their websites. They’ve registered 1,000’s of domain names do you really think they’re after your content? It simply doesn’t make sense. There’s nothing wrong with asking the question — but you’ve asked and they answered directly and quickly. Not sure I support .XXX but they’re not avoiding your questions.
LikeLike
ElliotNess29 10:00 pm on December 14, 2011 Permalink |
Hey D-man,
I repeatedly stated I wasn’t a lawyer. You clearly aren’t one either nor do you have a clue about what you are trying to say. If it took you all of 5 seconds to find “nearly the exact” same wording on Yahoo’s TOS then I would suggest you take a lot more time and really read Yahoo’s TOS properly because it isn’t even close to exactly the same thing as ICM Registry’s TOS. You might want to read my post a little more carefully for a second time so you can see the glaring differences between the two TOSs. Try looking very carefully and slowly so as not to miss anything in Yahoo’s TOS but you can’t find the words “*We may assign this contract at any time without notice to you*. anywhere. A very strange statement for a TOS that isn’t supposed to apply to the registry/registrant agreement.
The fact that there was no TOS to be found when ICM Registry was taking Founders Program registrations but shows up just in time for the big mass sale pitch is clearly relevant. How exactly is the information about Webpower Inc./Ifriends lawyers being all in important positions to control what happens within the DOTXXX domains not relevant? Sure looks like Webpower Inc. has stacked the deck in their favor. I stand corrected about Webpower/Ifriends being the first announced by ICM Registry but I don’t remember a very big press release concerning casting.xxx nor did they get a billboard advertisement in Times Square either. You might want to read and think carefully before you speak so quickly.
I haven’t seen you present any law credentials so what do you really know concern the legalities of this registry/registrant agareement and their TOS? There is no real proof that it is only for their website as I stated before it contains a very suspicious clause. They have registered 1000’s of domains and will probably register a lot more by the time ICM Registry is done. It is not just Amanda’s content they would be able to use but everyone who has a DOTXXX domain. Wow, it clearly is a huge money grab for the DOTXXX domains sales but an even bigger grab if ICM Registry and all it attachments can benefit from everyone’s total content. Does that make sense to you now?
This question is important and they answered quickly also just a little too quickly while trying to get Amanda to talk quietly off Twitter and with their legal dept. What was ICM Registry really trying hard to hide from all her followers and other adult performers that she knows. If ICM registry hadn’t avoided her questions like you say then why is it that she needed to write this blog and others like myself don’t see them answering anything? ICM Registry and DOT.XXX on twitter are trying to tell her, “it’s okay just trust us that the TOS doesn’t apply to the registry/registrant agreement” yet look where it has been placed! They clearly have all the control and in their own words, “at our sole discretion…” may change anything at any time without prior notice to the Domain owners, like it or not.
Please don’t insult me and be so naive to what clearly is starting to look like the old shell game and you, my friend clearly can’t even find the pea.
LikeLike
D Man 10:26 am on December 15, 2011 Permalink |
Hold on… ICM is bad because they answer questions directly and too fast… holy crap are you joking?
Specifically you might want to read Yahoo TOS section 9 CONTENT SUBMITTED OR MADE AVAILABLE FOR INCLUSION ON THE YAHOO! SERVICES… it says almost exactly what ICM website does about content submitted to sites it operates. Which is the question Amanda posed… You said you couldn’t even find similar wording on any site… so clearly you didn’t do any research.
Once again the TOS on their website doesn’t apply to domains registered under .XXX – why would you even think that it would? ICM is in the business of selling domain names what would they possibly want with Amanda or anyone elses content? ICANN would never allow that either so if you’re going to talk facts — have some instead of making ridiculous claims like ICM will use your content to build their own websites.
Where would you expect them to place the Terms of Service for using their website? Again do some research there was a huge PR about casting.xxx coming out as their first site; from what I read the billboard in times square was the press release which happens all the time. All your conspiracy theories are exactly that – made up theories.
Again not sure I support or agree with .XXX; but how can you possibly fault them for responding quickly and directly? One would assume they requested Amanda to DM them to give her another means to reach them directly or ask her questions which she wouldn’t answer in a public forum, or try and answer her with more than 140 charaters. And usually if someone has questions about a legal document where would you send them — to the legal department.
Bottom line; you aren’t a lawyer, you drew conclusions from a Website Terms of Service which clearly don’t and wouldn’t apply to another website; and then made a bunch of ridiculous claims essentially saying that ICM is a puppet of iFriends… all just ridiculous.
LikeLike
ElliotNess29 5:23 pm on December 15, 2011 Permalink |
Hold on D-Man,
Are you the one joking, that the TOS for Yahoo and ICM look “nearly, almost exactly” the same? Take off your rose colored sunglasses dude! Really, why don’t you take the time to read the whole Yahoo TOS and then read the whole ICM Registry TOS. They are absolutely different and the wording has some similarities but ICM Registry’s doesn’t have the same details and again very vague. Does Yahoo put their TOS with other policies? NO! It’s placed all by itself, localed at the bottom of their home page. ICM Registry decides to put it in with all the policies, rules for purchasing the XXX domains, IFFOR policies and right under the Registry/Registrant agreement. YOU ARE RIGHT NOT CONFUSING! I was just saying that it’s an odd, strange place to put the TOS if it is not to apply with the Registry/ Registrant agreement after all isn’t ICM Registry going to be providing services to all the .xxx sites because you have joined the sponsored community in order to own a XXX domain. I did my research very carefully.
Where in the Yahoo TOS do you see this statement or one as you like to say “nearly, almost exactly?
“This TOS does not replace, modify, or limit in any way any contract or agreement between you and ICM with respect to reservation or registration of a Domain Name in the .XXX TLD or your status as a member of the Sponsored Community for the .XXX TLD, including, without limitation, the Registry/Registrant Agreement.
We may assign this contract at any time without notice to you.”
ICM only answered parts of Amanda’s questions and didn’t seem to want the Twitter world seeing the conversation. Amanda said she wouldn’t deal with their legal department due to her conflict with the lawyers. I only agreed with her because if I wanted to hear a legal opinion or answer on something I am interested in purchasing, it wouldn’t be from their lawyers, it would be my OWN!
I am not a conspiracy theorist. Oh gosh, who would want to sell adult content on the Internet when you can make so much more money just selling the domains to people who do that? You can’t hide who owns a domain with companies like Go Daddy, Networks solutions or Moniker?
I am not going to split hairs over who was the first PR move by ICM Registry. A billboard in Times Square and Los Angeles aren’t PR moves, just standard press release stuff?
Bottom line is you and I aren’t lawyers. I never made ridiculous claims saying that ICM registry is a puppet of Webpower Inc/Ifriends. I only pointed out what has already been announced by ICM Registry and its IFFOR that the Webpower Inc./Ifriends ‘ general counsel is on the IFFOR with their past assoc. general counsel who is now the general counsel of ICM Registry. I haven’t seen representation from Casting.xxx, Corbin Fisher, or Frank Schilling on the IFFOR, have you? Dotxxx is not just another TLD. It’s a TLD with rules and regulations. Rules and regulations all dotxxx domain owners have to abide by. Rules and regulations that are created by IFFOR and ICM.
Just saying!
LikeLike
amanda36c 3:02 am on December 16, 2011 Permalink |
Mr Ness (or whoever you are), I appreciate what you’re saying but don’t want this to get out of hand. Same goes for you, D Man. You both have valid points but I’m still not convinced that ICM’s TOS does not apply to me, as the owner of amanda36c.xxx . In fact, I have every reason to believe it DOES; just look where it is on the site – filed under the heading “Legal Agreements & Notices”, it’s the link directly below “Registry/Registrar Agreement”.
I want to hear this from ICM (and ICM only!). A yes or no answer. A simple “yes” or a simple “no”. Nothing else. No twisting of words. No games. No bullshit.
This is the question I want a “YES” or “NO” answer to:
Let’s say I buy amanda36c.xxx under the Performer’s Program. Is the TOS applicable to me? I know that the Registry/Resistrant Agreement applies to me. Does the Website Terms of Service also apply to me? Yes or no?
Amanda
LikeLike
Alien 8:17 am on December 18, 2011 Permalink |
It does not apply. They told you it does not apply. I looked at this and uhmm clearly it does not apply. Paranoia makes great page views. Nice job!
LikeLike
amanda36c 6:56 pm on December 19, 2011 Permalink |
Yes, they told me it does not apply. They told me a lot of things. That is my point. I do not believe them. Why would I, after they broke my trust? Have you read my post?
LikeLike
ElliotNess29 1:18 pm on December 19, 2011 Permalink |
Alien,
You are a lawyer in your spare time after all your audio and Web Design business. You might want to read Amanda’s next post because you would have to be a complete idiot to believe anything that the ICM Registry says. They are supposed to be so busy launching all these new DOTXXX domains but have the time to run into one adult performers blog to be sure to persuade her that the TOS doesn’t apply to their Registry/registrant agreement. ICM Registry then decides it needs to pretend to be just another JOE to argue with me while trying to discredit any of the logic that I presented to Amanda and clearly avoid responding to any of my points with anything logical. ICM Registry never answers any of Amanda’s other straight yes or no questions on Twitter but again take the time to make a change to their TOS just to clarify it for Amanda, so they say. ODD behaviour of such a big company who wants people to trust that they are going to do all the right things under their DOTXXX domain control.
I don’t find Amanda paranoid at all but just the opposition. She isn’t naive enough to just trust ICM Registry at their word especially when their General Legal Counsel used to work for the company that she had a financial dispute with after years of working on their site. That’s just good business sense!
Amanda is just trying to get the real truth from ICM Registry which seems like an impossibility given their current track record. She has the integrity and good sense to show people the true colors of ICM registry and their underhanded tacits. She could have kept this information to herself but instead showed courage by making sure everyone in the Adult industry (performers, webmasters, and site owners) were completely informed of what she had discover about ICM Registry, no matter what the scrutiny or personnal attacks on herself.
Keep asking your questions Amanda and maybe others will open their mouths too. Sometimes it takes just one person to get many people more involved!
LikeLike