[NCSG-Discuss] Closed Generics - a letter together

[McTim]

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com>wrote:

>  Milton,
> Because a domain name is not a Top Level Domain.
>


a TLD IS a domain name.


>   If we follow your reasoning, there's no reason to perform extensive
> Technical, Operational and Financial Showings/Review of New Registries.  We
> don't examine registrants, so why should we examine New gTLD Registries?
>
>
high barrier of entry methinks.


>  Clearly, it's because they are fundamentally different. Here's something
> I wrote awhile ago -- my thoughts based on my background as both a
> Registrant and a Registry:
> --------------------
>
> *Why is COMPUTER.COM different from .COMPUTER?*
>
> Given the history of ICANN and our Applicant Guidebook, the answer to this
> question follows from the existing gTLD program as we have extended it into
> the New gTLD Program. It is the expectation set by our Community, by the
> Board and by our New gTLD rules that Registries register domain names on a
> non-discriminatory basis to Registrants and Registrars.
>
>
>

except if they apply for and get an "exception" as you pointed out earlier.



>     Dot-COM, .ORG and .NET are the public’s models for .BOOK, .APP and
> .CLOUD.
>


.org and.net were originally limited to non-profits and network
infrastructure bodies respectively.



>  People know that Verisign registers .COM to a wide variety of companies
> and businesses. While computer.com is registered to a single entity,
> monopolizing its use, the same is not true of the TLD itself. *Verisign
> must operate .COM in a non-discriminatory way – to registrants and
> registrars. That’s the essence of being a gTLD Registry. *
>
>
>     Thus, for the top level and based on our rules, the public expects
> generic words such as “com,” “biz,” “book,” “app”  and “cloud” to be run
> as Registries in the truest sense of the world – as entities engaged in the
> management, operation and security of the TLD -- committed to registering
> domain names on a non-discriminatory basis to registrants and registrars
> globally.  That’s a promise set out in the rules. The public will expect
> to find the normal array of competitors and innovators in New gTLDs, just
> as within existing TLDs.
>



except for .cat, .museum and several others.

My point is that there is a precedent, there are rules as you have pointed
out, and the application of those rules will be where decisions are made.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20130225/46aedaac/attachment-0001.html>