According to Reuters, Barclays has plead guilty to trying to manipulate foreign exchange rates, and has agreed to pay substantial fines, along with other major banks.

Barclays is also the operator of the .Barclays new top-level domain name. According to section 4.3(f) of the registry agreement with ICANN,

ICANN may, upon notice to Registry Operator, terminate this Agreement if (i) Registry Operator knowingly employs any officer who is convicted of a misdemeanor related to financial activities or of any felony, or is judged by a court of competent jurisdiction to have committed fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, or is the subject of a judicial determination that ICANN reasonably deems as the substantive equivalent of any of the foregoing and such officer is not terminated within thirty (30) calendar days of Registry Operator’s knowledge of the foregoing, or (ii) any member of Registry Operator’s board of directors or similar governing body is convicted of a misdemeanor related to financial activities or of any felony, or is judged by a court of competent jurisdiction to have committed fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, or is the subject of a judicial determination that ICANN reasonably deems as the substantive equivalent of any of the foregoing and such member is not removed from Registry Operator’s board of directors or similar governing body within thirty (30) calendar days of Registry Operator’s knowledge of the foregoing. (emphasis added)

This is not a case where it’s a single rogue employee or officer has been found guilty of a financial crime. Here, it is the entire bank (and registry operator) that has plead guilty. In my opinion, ICANN should exercise its rights to terminate the .Barclays TLD from the root.

If not, ICANN should clearly explain why it has chosen to allow a registry that has plead guilty to serious financial crimes to continue to operate that TLD. It would, in my opinion, set a dangerous precedent to allow a firm found guilty of financial crimes to continue to operate a trusted registry at the top level. Indeed, it would reinforce the arguments of the many critics of the new gTLDs program that ICANN simply refuses to hold bad contracted parties accountable for their misbehaviour.