new gtld policy update - 11 April mtg and staff notes

[Robin Gross]

A few key issues were discussed at the new gtld policy meeting on 11  
April in LA.

Here are the 70 slides from the meeting:
   http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/new-gtlds-policy- 
discussion-11apr08.pdf

1.  There is a question as to whether a TLD operator can expand its  
business down the line in ways not outlines in its original  
application for a TLD.  We have argued that TLD operators should not  
be straight jacketed into their business plan 1.0 and should be  
allowed to expand their use of the TLD in lawful ways.  Some in the  
business and registry constituencies want for TLD operators to have  
to go back and receive approval from ICANN every time they want to  
use the TLD in a new way.

2.  Some want country names and their abbreviations to be off-limits  
to anyone for use in a top-level domain.  There is a lot of pressure  
from GAC to reserve words they would want to own.  The GNSO's  
response has been GAC can object to any application like anyone else  
and take the names it wants that way.  But there are still calls for  
a reserved name list for country names and abbreviations.

3.  When two applicants want the same string, ICANN is proposing a  
"beauty contest" method of determining who should be given the  
string.  This "comparison evaluation" was not in the GNSO's  
recommendations and is something ICANN staff has created.  Many in  
the GNSO expressed concern about this method, but it remains to be  
seen whether the GNSO will have final say in what its recommendations  
are.  The beauty contest criteria for deciding who is awarded a  
domain name include very subjective and arbitrary evaluation criteria  
such as "provides value", or is "important" to ICANN.

4.  The morality / public order string criteria continue to be  
problematic.  There is some discussion as to who has standing to  
raise an objection to a domain name based on morality and public  
order.   We have argued that only governments should have such  
standing, but the current wording of the recommendation opens it up  
for any one in the world to object to a string based on morality and  
public order.    ICANN will adopt a "one-size-fits-all" for standards  
of morality and public order.  Very little information on this issue  
was given at the 11 April mtg (only 1 slide of  70 slides).

5.  There will be a 3-part test for OBJECTIONS:
  For an objection to be successful in killing an application for a  
domain name, the objector must prove that:
-       Community opposition to the application is substantial; AND

-       Community invoked is a coherent community; AND

-       There is a reasonable association between the community  
invoked and the TLD string applied for.

6.  The trademark and business constituencies want special privileges  
for software companies that would prohibit a TLD if it corresponds to  
a file extension (like .doc or .pdf).  ICANN staff said it was told  
that there were no technical problems with such a TLD, but the  
trademark industry is still pushing for this and may get the special  
carve out.  At the meeting I argued that if there is a question of  
confusion, the objection process should be used to solve that  
question.  Those companies can go through the same process that  
everyone else must go through to raise their objection based on  
likelihood of confusion.  But the voices for the special carve-out  
are loud and well-funded; and the contracting parties don't care much  
one way or another so will likely give in to the pressure to create a  
presumption against a file extension as a TLD.


7.  Chart of new gtld sting evaluation process:
   http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/gtld-process- 
simplified-10apr08.pdf

8.  And see also the attached briefing notes from ICANN staff of 14  
April.




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20080421/4fb9dfef/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Briefing-on-new-tld-implementation-2008-04-10.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 65009 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20080421/4fb9dfef/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20080421/4fb9dfef/attachment-0001.html>