Domain Name Wire | Domain Name News
Domain Name Industry News
7 Comments
Judge sides with Unstoppable Domains, which promised not to sue (again) over the alt-root domain extension.
The controversy started when Scott Florcsk began selling domains under his .wallet Handshake domain name. Unstoppable Domains has its own .wallet extension.
After a series of lawsuits, there was one remaining claim: Florcsk asked for declaratory judgment that he wasn’t violating any of Unstoppable Domains’ trademarks by selling .wallet domains.
However, Unstoppable Domains issued a covenant not to sue Florcsk for IP issues on .wallet and agreed to extend this covenant to registries, registrars, and registrants. The company argued that this made the claim for declaratory judgment moot.
Florcsk argued that the case should continue. Backed with funds from Handshake supporter Namecheap to carry out his lawsuit, Florcsk argued that the covenant not to sue only applied to .wallet, and he wanted assurance that Unstoppable wouldn’t sue over other domains.
But in an opinion published today, the judge agreed with Unstoppable. He noted that the declaratory judgment Florcsk sought only applied to .wallet, and the covenant not to sue covers that.
Categories: Policy & Law
Andrew Allemann has been registering domains for over 25 years and publishing Domain Name Wire since 2005. He has been quoted about his expertise in domain names by The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and NPR. Connect with Andrew: LinkedIn – Twitter/X – Facebook
Stay up-to-date with the latest analysis and news about the domain name industry by joining our mailing list.
No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
says
So Florcsk got what he wanted, why all the misleading and confusing jabs? “Judge sides with Unstoppable Domains, which promised not to sue (again) over the alt-root domain extension.” This could have been much shorter and clearer. “Judge makes clear that the covenant already contains what what Florcsk wanted and thus the continuing the case is redundant. Case closed”
says
This article somehow makes it sound that Unstoppable Domains won something when they lost on all counts and Florcsk got all that he wanted.
says
Wow…it’s finally over. And both UD and Handshake are irrelevant.
says
UD’s irrelevance is infinitely worse, because it’s investment giants who will lose a lot of money when UD goes down. On the other hand, Handshake was and still is an ongoing experiment where enthusiasts can contribute and see how the tech evolves now an in the future and if the status quo ever changes or not, when that happens Handshake can benefit from positioning itself ready to go. Entrenched industry players were never willingly going to give up their dominance even if there tech were 100x better, it’s pure realpolitik.
says
The relevancy of either hasn’t changed much, like every crypto based project they simply ride the wave of of bitcoin like every other such project, but handshake is a good faith effort while UD is a grift.
ICANN’s relevance is not due to its virtue or merit but by nature of being blessed with a government provided monopoly. And this will remain so until something can somehow dislodge or bypass that monopoly meaningfully.
says
What government granted monopoly does ICANN have?
says
The key point is that while ICANN appears private, it’s effectively a government-backed monopoly through a complex web of regulatory, technical, and legal mechanisms. The “choice” to use ICANN’s system is heavily constrained by government action at multiple levels.
1. Direct US Government Control
– Root zone file changes require US Department of Commerce approval
– IANA functions were historically US government-controlled
– US maintains oversight through “Affirmation of Commitments”
2. Technical Infrastructure Lock-in
– Major operating systems come pre-configured with ICANN’s root servers
– ISPs are typically required by regulations to use ICANN’s DNS system
– Changing these defaults requires administrative privileges
3. Legal Framework
– ICANN operates under US jurisdiction (California-based)
– Contracts are enforceable under US law
– Trademark dispute resolution backed by government enforcement
4. International Influence
– US diplomatic pressure maintains ICANN’s global authority
– Trade agreements often require ICANN compliance
– Alternative systems face significant regulatory barriers
This creates a de facto government monopoly where technical standards, legal requirements, and international agreements reinforce ICANN’s control over the internet’s addressing system.
Domain Name Wire is a trade publication for the domain name industry covering topics relevant to domain investors, brand owners, policy makers, domain registrars and registries, and more. Founded in 2005, Domain Name Wire has been cited by Wall Street Journal, New York Times, NPR, and Washington Post. Read More About DNW
Stay up-to-date with the latest analysis and news about the domain name industry by joining our mailing list.
No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
© 2005–2025 Domain Name Wire · DNW and Domain Name Wire are trademarks of Brainstorm Labs, LLC
About The Author
More Stories
Advancing the Safer Internet Initiative for Everyone
Youth in Action: Contributing to a More Connected and Inclusive Digital Future
Advancing a Connected Future for Indigenous Communities