When last we left the nascent ".sucks" generic top-level domain, ICANN was calling for investigation and scrutiny into the pricing structure the domain’s designated registry was implementing. That registry, a company called Vox Populi, is currently offering sunrise pricing on ".sucks" domain names with the MSRP going as high as $2,499. Individual registrars are charged $1,999 for each registration, and the registrants themselves are charged whatever the registrar wants—"as low as $2,024 and as high as $3,977.99," according to Vox Populi). ICANN has raised accusations of "extortions" and "shakedowns," with the implication being that companies desperate to control their brand’s ".sucks" domain will be forced to pay large amounts to buy it.

Yesterday, Vox Populi CEO John Berard officially responded to ICANN’s criticisms with a legal demand letter via Vox Populi’s attorneys, Fish & Richardson P.C. (Ars was provided a copy of the letter, which can be read here). In it, the attorneys lay out their counterclaims to ICANN’s accusations, essentially saying that Vox Populi believes ICANN’s points are baseless and that its pricing is consistent with what it believes to be the fair market value.

Of particular note is the statement early in the letter—that for all the implications of bad conduct, "None of the letters in question identifies any manner in which any law might actually have been broken." The letter continues:

[I]nstead they merely suggest (without explanation or logic) that Vox Populi's pricing may lead to "cybersquatting" that could damage trademark owners. At the same time, though, the ICANN IPC's letter expressly recognizes that registrations on Vox Populi's .SUCKS registry are subject to ICANN's various trademark dispute resolution processes, which protect trademark owners from cybersquatting. And although the ICANN BC letter to the FTC and the OCA asserts that ICANN "does not wish to limit free speech or prevent criticism of any business," the only coherent expression of any potential concern is that businesses may feel compelled to register their trademarks "to defend [their] reputation from critics or competitors controlling their brand domain in .sucks and using it unfairly to criticize their products or services." To the extent such competitive use or criticism is unfair, trademark owners have a full complement of remedies that they can seek both through ICANN's dispute procedures and the laws of various different nations.

The letter goes on to describe–extensively—the good faith efforts Vox Populi has made to fulfill the contractual obligations assigned to it by ICANN as a registry. It concludes by noting that, although the company isn’t interested in any formal legal action yet, it really would like ICANN to leave it alone:

We hereby demand that ICANN refrain from taking any further action in the future to impede Vox Populi's ability to operate the new TLD .SUCKS registry in accordance with its contractual rights and obligations.

The issue might be about to get bigger, though; at least partially in response to ICANN’s request for scrutiny, the United States House Judiciary Committee is stepping in. On May 13, the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet will hold a hearing titled "Stakeholder Perspectives on ICANN: The .Sucks Domain and Essential Steps to Guarantee Trust and Accountability in the Internet’s Operation."

In a brief e-mail conversation with Ars last month, CEO Berard elaborated a bit on the decision to start out with such high pricing for .sucks names: "We did not want them tucked into the cupboard," he said, "So we needed to settle on a price that was meaningful. As for general availability, we wanted the same thing, but rather than hoping the names would not be put on the shelf, we wanted to dampen speculation. We think the suggested price does that."