[NCSG-Discuss] Fwd: [liaison6c] "Closed Generic" gTLD Applications
Robin Gross
robin at IPJUSTICE.ORG
Wed Feb 6 23:24:31 CET 2013
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen at icann.org>
> Date: February 6, 2013 2:17:41 PM PST
> To: liaison6c <liaison6c at gnso.icann.org>
> Subject: [liaison6c] "Closed Generic" gTLD Applications
>
>
> "Closed Generic" gTLD Applications
>
> Comment/Reply Periods (*)
> Important Information Links
> Comment Open:
> 5 February 2013
> Comment Close:
> 7 March 2013
> Close Time (UTC):
> 23:59
> Public Comment Announcement
> Reply Open:
>
> To Submit Your Comments (Forum)
> Reply Close:
>
> View Comments Submitted
> Close Time (UTC):
>
> Report of Public Comments
> Brief Overview
> Originating Organization:
> ICANN
> Categories/Tags:
> Top-Level Domains
> Purpose (Brief):
> To receive stakeholder views and suggestions on the topic of
> "closed generic" gTLD applications.
> Current Status:
> Existing provisions of the New gTLD Program do not provide specific
> guidance on this issue. Potential new provisions may be considered
> based on the comment provided and analysis undertaken.
> Next Steps:
> ICANN staff will review comments submitted and will provide a
> summary and analysis of these comments to the New gTLD Program
> Committee of the Board of Directors. The Committee will review this
> feedback as well as the additional research and analysis directed
> to inform its consideration on this issue.
> Staff Contact:
> Karen Lentz
> Email:
> karen.lentz at icann.org
> Detailed Information
> Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose
> ICANN is seeking public comment on the subject of "closed generic"
> gTLD applications and whether specific requirements should be
> adopted corresponding to this type of application. Stakeholder
> views are invited to help define and consider this issue. In
> particular, comments would be helpful in regard to proposed
> objective criteria for:
>
> classifying certain applications as "closed generic" TLDs, i.e.,
> how to determine whether a string is generic, and
> determining the circumstances under which a particular TLD operator
> should be permitted to adopt "open" or "closed" registration policies.
> The New gTLD Program Committee of the ICANN Board of Directors has
> discussed this issue and has also directed completion of a set of
> focused research and analysis items to inform any possible action
> to be taken. At its 2 February 2013 meeting, the Committee passed
> the following resolution:
>
> Whereas, the New gTLD Program Committee has received correspondence
> from the community addressing "closed generic" TLDs and understands
> that members of the community term a "closed generic" TLD as a TLD
> string that is a generic term and is proposed to be operated by a
> participant exclusively for its own benefit.
>
> Whereas, ICANN implemented the Generic Names Supporting
> Organization (GNSO) policy recommendations on the "Introduction of
> New Generic Top-Level Domains", and within those policy
> recommendations there is no specific policy regarding "closed
> generic" top-level domains (TLDs).
>
> Whereas, members of the community have expressed concerns regarding
> applications for "closed generic" TLDs.
>
> Whereas, the New gTLD Program Committee considers that it is
> important to understand all views and potential ramifications
> relating to 'closed generic' TLDs.
>
> Resolved (2013.02.02.NG01), the New gTLD Program Committee directs
> the President and CEO to open a 30-day public comment forum on this
> topic, which should include a call for identification of proposed
> objective criteria to classify applied-for TLDs as "closed generic"
> TLDs.
>
> Resolved (2013.02.02.NG02), the New gTLD Program Committee directs
> the President and CEO to, concurrently with the opening of the
> public comment forum, request the GNSO to provide guidance on the
> issue of "closed generic" TLDs if the GNSO wishes to provide such
> guidance. Guidance on this issue is requested to be provided by the
> close of the public comment forum.
>
> Resolved (2013.02.02.NG03), the New gTLD Program Committee directs
> the President and CEO to:
>
> Summarize and analyze all comments submitted in the public comment
> forum.
> Review materials supporting the policy development process
> resulting in the GNSO policy recommendations on the Introduction of
> New Generic Top-Level Domains and provide analysis of any
> discussions relating to the limitations on potential new gTLDs.
> Analyze the feasibility of objectively classifying applied for TLDs
> as "closed generic" TLDs.
> Provide an analysis as to whether the public interest and
> principles of international law are served by adopting a clear
> approach regarding 'closed generic' gTLDs.
> Provide a report to the New gTLD Program Committee informed by the
> comments received and analysis conducted, including alternatives to
> addressing this issue.
> Section II: Background
> Following the publication of the gTLD applications in June 2012,
> concerns have been brought to ICANN's attention regarding some
> applications for strings which are labelled as "closed generic."
> These applications are considered problematic by some due to the
> proposed use of the TLD by the applicant, e.g., using the TLD in a
> manner that is seen as inappropriately exclusive, particularly in
> the sense of creating a competitive advantage. These applications
> have been the subject of public comments and Early Warnings.
>
> Many of the communications link the issue of registration
> restrictions for a TLD with the Code of Conduct (Specification 9 to
> the gTLD Registry Agreement). However, it should be clarified that
> the Code of Conduct refers to registry-registrar interactions,
> rather than eligibility for registering names in the TLD. Rather
> than the Code of Conduct, the true issue of concern being expressed
> appears to be that in certain applications, the proposed
> registration policies are deemed inappropriate by some parties.
>
> The New gTLD Program has been built based on policy advice
> developed in the GNSO's policy development process. The policy
> advice did not contain guidance on how ICANN should place
> restrictions on applicants' proposed registration policies, and no
> such restrictions were included in the Applicant Guidebook.
>
> Defining a "generic" category of strings is a complex undertaking
> as strings may have many meanings and have implications for several
> languages. However, there are mechanisms built into the program
> (e.g., objection processes, GAC processes) as a means for concerns
> about specific applications to be considered and resolved as they
> arise.
>
> Recent correspondence has expressed concerns about the potential
> impact on competition and consumer choice, as well as phrasing the
> issue in terms of potential impact on the public interest. The New
> gTLD Program Committee considers it important to understand all
> views and potential ramifications relating to "closed generic" TLDs.
>
> Section III: Document and Resource Links
> List of gTLD applications received
> Letter from Michele Neylon, et al. [PDF, 56 KB]
> Letter from Kathryn Kleiman [PDF, 1.43 MB]
> Toronto Public Forum:
> GAC Early Warnings
> Letter from Michele Neylon, et al. [PDF, 362 KB]
> Letter from Microsoft Corporation [PDF, 267 KB]
> Section IV: Additional Information
> None
>
> (*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not
> guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis,
> reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period
> lapses.
>
>
> Glen de Saint Géry
> GNSO Secretariat
> gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org
> http://gnso.icann.org
>
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/20130206/5bd492e5/attachment.html>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list