http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-4-15feb10-en.htm
New gTLD Program Makes Available New
Documents for Community Discussion
15 February 2010
ICANN is publishing today several materials related to the
New gTLD Program. These materials have been grouped below in categories to
facilitate understanding.
Highlight: The Board plans to decide whether to conduct an
Expressions of Interest (EOI) exercise for new gTLDs at the ICANN Meeting in Nairobi. The Board and the community will have the opportunity to discuss
the Expressions of Interest and Pre-Registrations model, which takes into
account the community feedback during the two recent public comment periods.
Besides the background information and description of the current proposed
model, the Explanatory Memo also presents some discussion points about costs
and other implementation aspects. You can download here [PDF, 1.26 MB] the current
Explanatory Memo – Discussion of the Expressions of Interest
(EOI)/Pre-Registration Process Model.
Below is a list and direct link
to the new Public Forum. All open 15 February 2010 and close on 1 April 2010.
|
|
Document |
Redline |
Topic |
Direct link to Public
Forum |
|
TRADEMARK & COMMUNITY
PROTECTIONS |
Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) [PDF, 128 KB] |
redline
[PDF, 181 KB] |
The URS is one of the proposed mechanisms to address
trademark protection concerns – one of the open issues being addressed
by staff and community experts. The Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS)
Procedure describes an expedited process to provide trademark holders with a
rapid take-down in clear cut instances of trademark abuse. The URS
procedure is expected to provide trademark holders with a new, cost effective
remedy in addition to those available under the UDRP and applicable law. |
|
|
TM
Clearinghouse [PDF, 153 KB] |
redline
[PDF, 124 KB] |
The trademark clearinghouse is one of the
proposed mechanisms to address trademark protection concerns – one of
the open issues being addressed by staff and community experts. The Trademark
Clearinghouse Model describes a proposal for a central repository of
authenticated trademark information for use by registries to support their
sunrise or trademark claims processes. This Model is designed to
introduce efficiencies into the pre-launch processes for trademark holders
and new gTLD registries. |
||
|
Post Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (PPDRP) [PDF, 65 KB] |
redline
[PDF, 105 KB] |
The Trademark PPDRP is one of the proposed mechanisms to
address trademark protection concerns – one of the open issues being
addressed by staff and community experts. This post delegation procedure
should only afford trademark holders the right to proceed against registry
operators who have acted in bad faith, with the intent to profit from the
systemic registration of infringing domain names (or systemic cybersquatting)
or who have otherwise set out to use the gTLD for an improper purpose. |
||
|
Registry Restrictions Dispute Resolution Procedure (RRDRP) [PDF, 61 KB] |
redline
[PDF, 69 KB] |
The RRDRP is one of the proposed
mechanisms to address post delegation concerns. The purpose of the RRDRP is
to handle complaints from a harmed organization or individual alleging that a
community-based restricted gTLD registry operator was not meeting its
obligations to police the registration and use of domains within the
restrictions stated in the terms of the gTLD registry agreement. |
||
|
IDN ISSUES |
IDN
3 Character [PDF, 148 KB] |
|
This document is a follow-up to the
independent Implementation Working team’s recommendation on IDN string
requirements. The previous requirement for at least three characters in
all gTLD strings was considered problematic for some languages, and the team
released a recommendation to relax the requirement in some cases. An
excerpt of guidebook text is included to help inform the discussion. |
|
|
IDN
Variants [PDF, 160 KB] |
|
An independent Implementation Working
team has proposed an approach to IDN variant management at the top
level. Language communities that use variant characters are affected by
the management and implementation of variants in new TLDs . An excerpt
of guidebook text is included to help inform the discussion. |
||
|
REGISTRY OPERATIONS &
AGREEMENT |
Bench Marking of Registry Operations [PDF, 648 KB] |
|
An exercise to gather industry data on
registry operations was undertaken as part of the ongoing implementation of
the evaluation criteria and procedures for the New gTLD Program. This
took the form of a study including analysis of public industry information
and data collected through a survey of existing registry operators. |
|
|
Process for gTLD Registry Agreement Amendment [PDF, 129 KB] |
|
An update on discussions concerning the process for
future amendments to the registry agreements for new gTLDs. The paper
outlines and seeks comment on several possible amendment process models,
including a model recently proposed by the GNSO's Registry Stakeholder Group.
|
Public Comment Summaries and Analyses
After each public comment forum closes,
a summary and analysis in response to the general public is usually published.
Below is a list of summary analysis regarding New gTLD Program related public
forums recently closed.
Other Open Issues
Malicious Conduct
As a component of activities that ICANN has initiated to
reduce malicious conduct activities in new gTLDs, ICANN has created an
initiative called the High Security Zone Top Level Domain
("HSTLD") Advisory Group. This group brings together
community representatives to evaluate the viability of a voluntary program,
supporting control standards and incentives that could potentially be adopted
to provide an enhanced level of trust and security over the baseline
registration-authority controls. A concept paper was published as a component
of the new gTLD Draft Applicant Guidebook version 3 and can be referenced on
the following link: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/high-security-zone-verification-04oct09-en.pdf [PDF, 214 KB]
The HSLTD Advisory Group continues to work on the concept
of a voluntary HSTLD program. Relevant next steps include a review and approval
working draft material and work on controls necessary to support the HSTLD
purpose, goals and principles.
Also part of addressing malicious conduct concerns is the
creation of another advisory group addressing Zone File Access.
The group was formed to study and discuss (benefits and methods) to effectively
and efficiently enhance access to zone file information (anticipating an
environment with many gTLDs). Details of this groups work can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/zone-file-access-en.htm.
Updated documentation on the malicious conduct work will be
available prior to the Nairobi Meeting.
Market/Economic Analysis
Additional economic analysis is being undertaken. ICANN has
contracted to retain the services with Greg Rosston of Stanford University and
Michael Katz of University of California Berkeley, both in the United States.
The work will be done in a three-phase project plan with the initial reports
expected to be released in mid March and the second early June. During the
first phase, the economists will survey published studies and resources that
describe the potential impacts of new gTLD introduction; examine theoretical
arguments about benefits and costs of increased gTLDs; consider and propose
empirical studies to identify areas where additional work can serve to assess
costs and benefits. A verbal report on results will be presented during the ICANN Nairobi Meeting.
Vertical Integration (aka Registry/Registrar Separation)
Based on debates on the subject held at the ICANN meetings
in Seoul, discussion during the consultation with certain community
representatives held on 7 January 2010 in Washington D.C., and ongoing study,
ICANN will propose for community comment a new registry-registrar separation
model for inclusion in the next draft of the gTLD agreement. Additionally,
theBoard and community members will be discussing the issue in Nairobi.
Root Scaling
Staff anticipates a report from SSAC and RSSAC soon. Also,
four demand scenarios for application volumes have been modeled: below
expected, expected, above expected and significantly above expected. For each
demand scenario, there's an assumption that only a fraction of the applications
will lead to delegations, and that the processing time for the successful
applications will be spread out. If there are more than, say, 500 applications,
the processing will be batched further spreading out the delegation rates. These
models will be published before the Nairobi meeting.
Upcoming Critical Program Meetings
During the ICANN Meeting in Nairobi, staff will
hold several New gTLD sessions, including:
The Draft
Applicant Guidebook, Version 4 is expected to be published prior to the ICANN
Brussels Meeting (20-25 June 2010).
Related Resources:
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org
http://gnso.icann.org