February 2013 - council - lists.icann.org

CEO Roundtable II: The Registries
by Glen de Saint Géry 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

http://blog.icann.org/2013/02/ceo-roundtable-ii-the-registries/ CEO Roundtable II: The Registries by Fadi Chehadé on February 5, 2013 On Monday, I was very pleased to host more than a dozen leaders from the registry community; participants in our latest CEO Roundtable series focused on key issues and trends within the Domain Name System sector. Over the course of a day, we discussed the evolution of the DNS sector from a number of perspectives and explored the opportunities and risks that these changes pose. The group provided constructive ideas about creating a platform for growth, innovation, and greater consumer and investor awareness. Research analysis, the creation of an infographic depicting the DNS ecosystem, and mechanisms to educate the media and public about the DNS sector were also highlighted. In short, we addressed common goals, shared responsibilities and the value of raising awareness among consumers worldwide of the DNS sector, affirming our commitment to the public interest. I also expressed my hope and vision for a strengthened and streamlined business contracting framework between ICANN and its contracted parties. While the topic of the roundtable was not the new gTLD program, I was asked to clarify recent comments I made at the ICANN Registry and Registrar meeting in Amsterdam. I took the opportunity to reassure everyone that: * ICANN remains focused on the new gTLD timeline, and I am confident that we can do so without comprising ICANN's deep, immovable commitment to the stability of the DNS. * We do not foresee any delays of the new gTLD program, we are working to assure that none occur, and the entire organization is pressing forward to comply with deadlines. * We have assembled a team of qualified professionals, experienced in making complex programs fully operational, and they have my full confidence. Staff is working hard and it is important for the community to be aware of the intense demands placed upon them by the schedule. * We will continue to increase the volume of communications pertaining to operational details of the new gTLD program, addressing both the technical and political risks encountered at various decision points. * I will also endeavor to explain, to the extent possible, the trade-offs and various considerations being balanced during each implementation milestone of the new gTLD program. I am grateful to the registry leaders for their candid, constructive feedback and look forward to continued dialogue as we host more CEO roundtables through the spring. Finally, I have asked past roundtable participants to consider participating in a DNS Summit meeting to serve as the culminating event for this series. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Revised New gTLD Registry Agreement Including Additional Public Interest Commitments Specification
by Glen de Saint Géry 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

Revised New gTLD Registry Agreement Including Additional Public Interest Commitments Specification Comment/Reply Periods (*) Important Information Links Comment Open: 5 February 2013 Comment Close: 26 February 2013 Close Time (UTC): 23:59 Public Comment Announcement<https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-05feb13-en.htm> Reply Open: 27 February 2013 To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:comments-base-agreement-05feb13@icann.org> Reply Close: 20 March 2013 View Comments Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-base-agreement-05feb13> Close Time (UTC): 23:59 Report of Public Comments Brief Overview Originating Organization: ICANN Categories/Tags: Top-Level Domains Purpose (Brief): To receive community feedback on the revised New gTLD Registry Agreement that includes certain updates and changes, including a Public Interest Commitments Specification Current Status: The current draft of the New gTLD Registry Agreement was published in June 2012 as part of the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook: Base Agreement & Specifications<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-specs-04jun12-en…> [PDF, 917 KB]. The New gTLD Registry Agreement requires various updates and changes, including the addition of the Public Interest Commitments Specification. Next Steps: ICANN staff will consider public comments on the revised New gTLD Registry Agreement and recommend any additional necessary changes to the Board for approval. Staff Contact: Daniel Halloran Email: daniel.halloran(a)icann.org<mailto:daniel.halloran@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Revised%20New%20gTLD%20Registry%20Agreement%20Including%20Additional%20Public%20Interest%20Commitments%20Specification%20public%20comment%20period> Detailed Information Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose The New gTLD Registry Agreement is the contractual document between successful New gTLD Applicants and ICANN, and will govern the rights and obligations of new gTLD registry operators. ICANN proposes to revise the New gTLD Registry Agreement in connection with developments since the last posting of the Applicant Guidebook in June 2012 and a general review of the contractual needs of the new gTLD program. Among the proposed changes, ICANN has added the Public Interest Commitments Specification. The Public Interest Commitments Specification will require operators of new gTLDs to use only registrars that are party to the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (which is under negotiation). The Public Interest Commitments Specification is also a mechanism to allow registry operators to commit to certain statements made by the registry operator in its application for the gTLD, as well as to specify additional public interest commitments, in either case transforming such commitments into binding contractual obligations that may be enforced by ICANN through a new dispute resolution mechanism that will be available to any party harmed by a registry operator's failure to comply with such public interest commitments. Concurrent with this public comment period on the proposed revisions to the agreement, ICANN will also ask each applicant to submit a TLD-specific Public Interest Commitments Specification. ICANN will communicate directly with applicants regarding the details of submitting Public Interest Commitments Specification. ICANN expects to request applicants to submit their Public Interest Commitments Specifications by 5 March 2013, and ICANN plans to have them all posted for public review by 6 March 2013. The proposed revised New gTLD Registry Agreement is now open for public comment. Section II: Background The new generic Top-Level Domain (New gTLD) Program was developed to increase competition and choice by introducing new gTLDs into the Internet's addressing system. The Applicant Guidebook (AGB) was produced to define the program and provide instructions on the application process. Within the AGB, Module 5 contains the draft New gTLD Registry Agreement. This is the document that will be entered into by successful applicants and ICANN before proceeding to the next phase of delegation and will contain the rights and obligations of each New gTLD registry operator. The current version of the New gTLD Registry Agreement, published as part of the AGB in June 2012, requires certain updates and changes before it can be finalized for use by successful applicants. Each new gTLD application includes business plans and statements of intent regarding applicant plans for operation of the proposed new gTLD registry. For example, some applicants stated in their applications that they intend to implement registration restrictions or heightened rights protection mechanisms above those required in the current draft of the New gTLD Registry Agreement. Outside of community-based applications, there are no mechanisms for requiring these plans and objectives to be incorporated into the New gTLD Registry Agreement. The GAC's Toronto Communiqué provided advice to the Board of Directors of ICANN that "it is necessary for all of these statements of commitment and objectives to be transformed into binding contractual commitments, subject to compliance oversight by ICANN." In response to the GAC, the New gTLD Program Committee of the Board has approved a public comment period on a proposed Public Interest Commitments Specification as a mechanism to transform application statements into binding contractual commitments, as well as to give applicants the opportunity to voluntarily submit to heightened public interest commitments. The Public Interest Commitments Specification has been incorporated into the revised New gTLD Registry Agreement as Specification 11 and is being submitted for public comments along with various other updates and changes to the New gTLD Registry Agreement more specifically described in the Summary of Changes, available below. Section III: Document and Resource Links * Revised gTLD Registry Agreement with Public Interest Commitments Specification 2013-02-05 - clean<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-specs-05feb13-en…> [PDF, 886 KB] * Revised gTLD Registry Agreement with Public Interest Commitments Specification 2013-02-05 - red-lined<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-specs-redline-05…> [PDF, 787 KB] * Summary of Changes 2013-02-05<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-specs-summary-ch…> [PDF, 445 KB] * Draft gTLD Registry Agreement 2012-06-04 version: Base Agreement & Specifications<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-specs-04jun12-en…> [PDF, 917 KB] * ICANN Website for New Generic Top-Level Domains Applicant Guidebook: http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb 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(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

"Closed Generic" gTLD Applications
by Glen de Saint Géry 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

"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<https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb13-en.htm> Reply Open: To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:comments-closed-generic-05feb13@icann.org> Reply Close: View Comments Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-closed-generic-05feb13> 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(a)icann.org<mailto:karen.lentz@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20%27Closed%20Generic%27%20gTLD%20Applications%20public%20comment%20period> 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: 1. Summarize and analyze all comments submitted in the public comment forum. 2. 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. 3. Analyze the feasibility of objectively classifying applied for TLDs as "closed generic" TLDs. 4. 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. 5. 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 <http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus> * Letter from Michele Neylon, et al.<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/correspondence/neylon-et-al-to-…> [PDF, 56 KB] * Letter from Kathryn Kleiman<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/correspondence/kleiman-to-icann…> [PDF, 1.43 MB] * Toronto Public Forum<http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34215>: * GAC Early Warnings<https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/GAC+Early+Warnings> * Letter from Michele Neylon, et al.<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/correspondence/neylon-et-al-to-…> [PDF, 362 KB] * Letter from Microsoft Corporation<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/correspondence/pangborn-to-croc…> [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(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Revised New gTLD Registry Agreement Including Additional Public Interest Commitments Specification
by Glen de Saint Géry 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

Revised New gTLD Registry Agreement Including Additional Public Interest Commitments Specification Comment/Reply Periods (*) Important Information Links Comment Open: 5 February 2013 Comment Close: 26 February 2013 Close Time (UTC): 23:59 Public Comment Announcement<https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-05feb13-en.htm> Reply Open: 27 February 2013 To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:comments-base-agreement-05feb13@icann.org> Reply Close: 20 March 2013 View Comments Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-base-agreement-05feb13> Close Time (UTC): 23:59 Report of Public Comments Brief Overview Originating Organization: ICANN Categories/Tags: Top-Level Domains Purpose (Brief): To receive community feedback on the revised New gTLD Registry Agreement that includes certain updates and changes, including a Public Interest Commitments Specification Current Status: The current draft of the New gTLD Registry Agreement was published in June 2012 as part of the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook: Base Agreement & Specifications<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-specs-04jun12-en…> [PDF, 917 KB]. The New gTLD Registry Agreement requires various updates and changes, including the addition of the Public Interest Commitments Specification. Next Steps: ICANN staff will consider public comments on the revised New gTLD Registry Agreement and recommend any additional necessary changes to the Board for approval. Staff Contact: Daniel Halloran Email: daniel.halloran(a)icann.org<mailto:daniel.halloran@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Revised%20New%20gTLD%20Registry%20Agreement%20Including%20Additional%20Public%20Interest%20Commitments%20Specification%20public%20comment%20period> Detailed Information Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose The New gTLD Registry Agreement is the contractual document between successful New gTLD Applicants and ICANN, and will govern the rights and obligations of new gTLD registry operators. ICANN proposes to revise the New gTLD Registry Agreement in connection with developments since the last posting of the Applicant Guidebook in June 2012 and a general review of the contractual needs of the new gTLD program. Among the proposed changes, ICANN has added the Public Interest Commitments Specification. The Public Interest Commitments Specification will require operators of new gTLDs to use only registrars that are party to the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (which is under negotiation). The Public Interest Commitments Specification is also a mechanism to allow registry operators to commit to certain statements made by the registry operator in its application for the gTLD, as well as to specify additional public interest commitments, in either case transforming such commitments into binding contractual obligations that may be enforced by ICANN through a new dispute resolution mechanism that will be available to any party harmed by a registry operator's failure to comply with such public interest commitments. Concurrent with this public comment period on the proposed revisions to the agreement, ICANN will also ask each applicant to submit a TLD-specific Public Interest Commitments Specification. ICANN will communicate directly with applicants regarding the details of submitting Public Interest Commitments Specification. ICANN expects to request applicants to submit their Public Interest Commitments Specifications by 5 March 2013, and ICANN plans to have them all posted for public review by 6 March 2013. The proposed revised New gTLD Registry Agreement is now open for public comment. Section II: Background The new generic Top-Level Domain (New gTLD) Program was developed to increase competition and choice by introducing new gTLDs into the Internet's addressing system. The Applicant Guidebook (AGB) was produced to define the program and provide instructions on the application process. Within the AGB, Module 5 contains the draft New gTLD Registry Agreement. This is the document that will be entered into by successful applicants and ICANN before proceeding to the next phase of delegation and will contain the rights and obligations of each New gTLD registry operator. The current version of the New gTLD Registry Agreement, published as part of the AGB in June 2012, requires certain updates and changes before it can be finalized for use by successful applicants. Each new gTLD application includes business plans and statements of intent regarding applicant plans for operation of the proposed new gTLD registry. For example, some applicants stated in their applications that they intend to implement registration restrictions or heightened rights protection mechanisms above those required in the current draft of the New gTLD Registry Agreement. Outside of community-based applications, there are no mechanisms for requiring these plans and objectives to be incorporated into the New gTLD Registry Agreement. The GAC's Toronto Communiqué provided advice to the Board of Directors of ICANN that "it is necessary for all of these statements of commitment and objectives to be transformed into binding contractual commitments, subject to compliance oversight by ICANN." In response to the GAC, the New gTLD Program Committee of the Board has approved a public comment period on a proposed Public Interest Commitments Specification as a mechanism to transform application statements into binding contractual commitments, as well as to give applicants the opportunity to voluntarily submit to heightened public interest commitments. The Public Interest Commitments Specification has been incorporated into the revised New gTLD Registry Agreement as Specification 11 and is being submitted for public comments along with various other updates and changes to the New gTLD Registry Agreement more specifically described in the Summary of Changes, available below. Section III: Document and Resource Links * Revised gTLD Registry Agreement with Public Interest Commitments Specification 2013-02-05 - clean<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-specs-05feb13-en…> [PDF, 886 KB] * Revised gTLD Registry Agreement with Public Interest Commitments Specification 2013-02-05 - red-lined<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-specs-redline-05…> [PDF, 787 KB] * Summary of Changes 2013-02-05<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-specs-summary-ch…> [PDF, 445 KB] * Draft gTLD Registry Agreement 2012-06-04 version: Base Agreement & Specifications<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-specs-04jun12-en…> [PDF, 917 KB] * ICANN Website for New Generic Top-Level Domains Applicant Guidebook: http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb 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(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Resolution from new gTLD Program Committee meeting on 1 Feb 2013 on enforcing applicants' commitments
by Bruce Tonkin 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

From: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-01feb13… Whereas, applicants for new gTLDs identified certain purposes of the applied for gTLD and certain business plans that they intend to incorporate into the operation of their registry, but much of these plans are not currently anticipated to be incorporated as obligations into Registry Agreements. Whereas, the GAC's Toronto Communiqué includes advice to ICANN that "it is necessary for all of these statements of commitment and objectives to be transformed into binding contractual commitments, subject to compliance oversight by ICANN." Whereas the New gTLD Program Committee has devised a proposed mechanism to address the advice of the GAC. Resolved (2013.02.01.NG02), the New gTLD Program Committee directs the President and CEO to seek public comment on a proposed mechanism to address the GAC advice on these additional applicant commitments. Rationale for Resolution 2013.02.01.NG02 ================================ It is important to determine if it is possible to address the advice received from the GAC on this issue. Creating a mechanism through which applicants will make binding commitments to ICANN in alignment with their applications could serve to promote the transparency and accountability of all within the ICANN community. While work still remains in developing this mechanism, it is anticipated that the creation of these binding commitments will benefit the public interest. The work called for in this resolution will require resources to complete, though it is not anticipated that this planning work will exceed budgeted resources. If properly implemented, the introduction of a mechanism to incorporate additional binding commitments could result in a positive benefit on the security, stability and resiliency of the DNS.

1 0

Re: [council] Request to GNSO on "closed generic" strings.
by Alan Greenberg 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

Note the March 7 close of this comment period (and apparently no reply period) when GNSO input is requested. Alan At 05/02/2013 09:17 PM, Bruce Tonkin wrote: >PS, I somehow missed some text below: > >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. > >Regards, >Bruce Tonkin

1 0

RE: New gTLD Program Committee resolution on "closed generic" strings
by Bruce Tonkin 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

Also see: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-02feb13… For the rationale behind the resolution. Regards, Bruce Tonkin -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Tonkin Sent: Wednesday, 6 February 2013 1:48 PM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: New gTLD Program Committee resolution on "closed generic" strings The text has been updated on the ICANN website http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/closed-generic-05feb13-en.htm to read: 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: 1. Summarize and analyze all comments submitted in the public comment forum. 2. 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. 3. Analyze the feasibility of objectively classifying applied for TLDs as "closed generic" TLDs. 4. 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. 5. Provide a report to the New gTLD Program Committee informed by the comments received and analysis conducted, including alternatives to addressing this issue.

1 0

RE: New gTLD Program Committee resolution on "closed generic" strings
by Bruce Tonkin 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

The text has been updated on the ICANN website http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/closed-generic-05feb13-en.htm to read: 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: 1. Summarize and analyze all comments submitted in the public comment forum. 2. 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. 3. Analyze the feasibility of objectively classifying applied for TLDs as "closed generic" TLDs. 4. 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. 5. Provide a report to the New gTLD Program Committee informed by the comments received and analysis conducted, including alternatives to addressing this issue.

1 0

Request to GNSO on "closed generic" strings.
by Bruce Tonkin 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

PS, I somehow missed some text below: 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. Regards, Bruce Tonkin -----Original Message----- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Wednesday, 6 February 2013 1:03 PM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] New gTLD Program Committee resolution on "closed generic" strings Hello All, Note the new gTLD program committee passed the following resolution at its meeting on 2 Feb 2012: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/closed-generic-05feb13-en.htm 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 and understands that members of the community are applying a definition of a "closed generic" TLD as a TLD string that is a generic term that 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.n01), the New gTLD Program Committee directs the President and CEO to open a 21-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.n02), the New gTLD Program Committee directs the President and CEO to: 1. Summarize and analyze all comments submitted in the public comment forum. 2. 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. 3. Analyze the feasibility of objectively classifying applied for TLDs as "closed generic" TLDs. 4. 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. 5. Provide a report, including alternatives, to the New gTLD Program Committee informed by the comments received and analysis conducted.

1 0

New gTLD Program Committee resolution on "closed generic" strings
by Bruce Tonkin 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

Hello All, Note the new gTLD program committee passed the following resolution at its meeting on 2 Feb 2012: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/closed-generic-05feb13-en.htm 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 and understands that members of the community are applying a definition of a "closed generic" TLD as a TLD string that is a generic term that 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.n01), the New gTLD Program Committee directs the President and CEO to open a 21-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.n02), the New gTLD Program Committee directs the President and CEO to: 1. Summarize and analyze all comments submitted in the public comment forum. 2. 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. 3. Analyze the feasibility of objectively classifying applied for TLDs as "closed generic" TLDs. 4. 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. 5. Provide a report, including alternatives, to the New gTLD Program Committee informed by the comments received and analysis conducted.

1 0