One of the challenges facing ICANN since announcing the New gTLD program in 2008 is a reliable forecast for the demand for New gTLDs. In addition to helping satisfy the need to back up the economic assessment study, a reliable forecast is instrumental in determining the scope of both the administrative and technical infrastructure required.
ICANN is now asking for public comment on a recent proposal to seek expressions of interest from parties interesting in applying for new gTLDs. The public comment period will extend until 11 December 2009., Interested parties are encouraged to offer support, provide constructive criticism, or put forward suggestions as to the content and requirements of an EOI.
Some suggestions which have been proposed so far are:
- The EOI should include, at a minimum, the name string applied for, name of the applying entity and contact information.
- An accompanying fee of $50,000 to be later credited to the full application fee ($185,000). The idea of the fee is to help ensure interest from only serious participants.
- Stipulation that only EOI applicants be allowed to participate in the first round of applications.
ICANN staff are expected to review the comments and provide a plan for board consideration at ICANN’s next board meeting 9 December 2009.
Details on how to provide your comment, and guidelines for input into the EOI, can be viewed by clicking here.
The recent ICANN meeting in Seoul South Korea resulted a great deal of information about IDN-ccTLDs and New gTLDs.
IDN-ccTLDs are internationalized domain names (IDN) for country-code top level domain names (ccTLDs) that use non-Latin language scripts to represent the name of the country (e.g. 中 国 in addition to .cn for China). The ICANN Board approved the IDN-ccTLD fast track process to move ahead as planned. Beginning 16 November 2009, countries can apply for an IDN that is a meaningful representation of the country’s name in its native script language. The applications will go through a detailed review and approval process, and there is a possibility of some IDNs being created late next year. Whether that could happen in time to allow a formal launch before 2011 is unknown at this time.
As for as New gTLDs, a definitive time-line for implementation of the initiative no longer exists. De-emphasizing the implementation date along with discussions at the meeting around the rights protection measures appears to be a positive signal to corporations and other trademark holders that there is greater interest in getting the process right, rather than just launching new gTLDs. There are two main right protection initiatives that are being worked in tandem. One is an IP clearinghouse, a proposed central database for trademarks, and the other is a uniform rapid suspension (URS) procedure. The URS is intended to complement current UDRP processes by reducing the cost and complexity of actions by legitimate rights holders against fairly obvious intentional infringement.
Previously there were estimates of 300 or more new TLDs potentially being approved for introduction with each round of submissions. However a proposal to introduce DNSSEC implementation into the approval process comes with a request from some in the technical community to limit the rate at which new top level names (both gTLDs and ccTLDs) are added per year ( e.g. to 100 or so) to avoid overloading the business processes for changing root zone records and the network or computer resources ahead of capacity upgrades.
The 3rd revision of the applicant guidebook has been made available for viewing and comment on ICANN’s website and the comment period extends through 22 November 2009. Both the IP clearinghouse and URS proposals are posted separately, and comments are being taken on those documents as well.
Set out below are a number of the key items noted in the ICANN Board meeting minutes with additional commentary for clarity:
ccTLD-IDNS
- Applications from countries will be accepted starting 16 November 2009
- Applicable to only established countries or territories at this time having script languages in one of the currently approved ISO languages.
- Once the IDN-ccTLD name is agreed, a country still needs to follow the standard IANA processes for selecting the manager of that IDN-ccTLD registry.
- It’s possible some ccTLD IDNs may be added to the root zone late in 2010 at which time a sunrise process could be announced by each ccTLD registry.
- Currently accepted launch periods and resolution procedures will be applicable for the new IDN-ccTLDs.
New gTLDs
- No estimated timeframe available for accepting proposals.
- Work remains on agreement and approval of rights protection measures.
- Introduction of New gTLDs may be limited to a maximum per year initially (could be as low as 100).
- Participating in the first round of New gTLDs may require submission of an expression of interest to allow ICANN to get a better estimate on demand and identify potential difficult cases so that any procedures can be modified prior to launching the formal application process.
- Public comment period extends through 22 November 2009.
With the potential for hundreds of applications for New gTLDs in the first round ICANN is looking to have a global roster of qualified reviewers in place. So far the growing applicant list includes names from well known consultancies including Deloitte, Deloitte & Laga, Ernst & Young, GeoLang LTD, KPMG and Webb Henderson.
Given the reputation of these firms this indicates applications will receive a great deal of scrutiny and need to contain detailed and thoroughly documented support information. For entities interested in applying for a new gTLD, this underscores the necessity of securing qualified assistance in preparing the application and operational plan.
The announcement with the current list of applicants can be viewed on the ICANN Website.
ICANN and the UPU have reached agreement paving the way for the creation of .post. The gTLD was initially proposed in the 2004 application round. This agreement marks the first sponsorship of a TLD by an inter-governmental organization and will likely serve as the model for similar organizations in the future.
About the UPU
The UPU was created in 1874 and is now a specialized agency of the United Nations.
Click here to read the full announcement
ICANN has published the Affirmation of Commitments by the United States Department of Commerce and ICANN.
The agreement affirms by both ICANN and the US Government the fact that ICANN has become a truly globally directed organization, and The US Government’s endorsement of the rapid introduction of internationalized country code top level domain names (ccTLDs).
As expanding the top-level domain space is contemplated, ICANN committed to ensuring the various issues involved (including competition, consumer protection, security, stability and resiliency, malicious abuse issues, sovereignty concerns, and rights protection) will be adequately addressed prior to implementation.
If and when new gTLDs (whether in ASCII or other language character sets) have been in operation for one year, ICANN will organize a review to examine the extent to which the introduction or expansion of gTLDs has promoted competition, consumer trust and consumer choice, as well as effectiveness of (a) the application and evaluation process, and (b) safeguards put in place to mitigate issues involved in the introduction or expansion.
In a recorded address, ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom stated “So the Affirmation is our commitment to be global and to report to the global community and then, technologically, we’re opening up other pieces of the internet, too.”
See the entire document here
In a 15 September letter, the Members of the US House Committee on the Judiciary called upon ICANN to respond to a number of questions.
The committee specifically requested to know which of the IRT recommendations will be adopted and if ICANN will conduct an empirical study to examine the impact on competition additional gTLDs will provide. Most notably the committee asked if ICANN recognizes a need for some form of permanent agreement with the US Government to replace the Joint Project Agreement which expires on 30 Sept 2009.
You can view the PDF of the Letter here
Twitter recently selected Melbourne IT to manage its domain name portfolio. “We are very pleased to be working with Twitter, as a rapidly growing company that has vastly extended the reach of social networking,” said Theo Hnarakis, CEO and Managing Director of Melbourne IT. “Companies with a significant Internet presence recognise the value Melbourne IT Digital Brand Services delivers, as a leading provider of digital brand management and protection services.”
Today’s numerous country code top level domain names and all the possible name variations for a company’s products, services, trademarks, and brands make managing a domain portfolio incredibly complex. The coming introduction of new gTLDs will add a whole new dimension, making it essential to work with a partner having the experience to help develop a cost effective, top-down approach to plan and manage a complete domain strategy. It’s the experience in the domain name space that is making Melbourne IT the top choice for companies like Twitter that fully leverage the Internet.
See the complete press release
ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom penned his thoughts on being selected to lead the organization and his vision to support globally unified Internet.
Specifically relating to the new gTLD initiative are the following comments:
The Internet has historically thrived whenever the system is opened up further to allow users to express their creativity and innovation. We are now working on opening up the top-level domains so that not only nations but also other peoples and groups can have a unique identity on the Internet.
For example, the chief of the Zulu tribe, His Majesty King Goodwill Zwelithini kaBhekuzulu, recently sent a letter notifying us of his intent to register the dot-zulu domain name so that different but related businesses and other groups can be linked by their domain name to the entire Zulu community. According to His Majesty, “We believe that the .Zulu TLD, as conceived and proposed by the Dot Zulu Project Inc. represents the best interests of the Zulu community and will be able to provide a viable structure for us as an evolving community.” New York City and the city of Berlin have expressed a similar interest in their own domain names. It is impossible to imagine the possibilities that could occur when these and a multitude of other TLDs are opened.
The ICANN responsibility to support methods for securely introducing new TLDs was specified in the original White Paper that led to our formation. And our original 1998 memorandum of understanding with the U.S. Government stated one of our key responsibilities this way: “Oversight of the policy for determining the circumstances under which new top level domains would be added to the root system.” It went on to say, “The Parties will jointly design, develop, and test the mechanisms, methods, and procedures that will achieve the transition without disrupting the functional operation of the Internet.” According to Chairman of the Board Peter Dengate Thrush, “We are declaring success on these points. It’s been 11 years. We have developed and tested those mechanisms, and we find that they work.”
Read the full article here
At the recent ICANN meeting in Sydney the Intellectual Property Constituency’s Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT) presented details of their recommendations. As expected, the recommendations were the subject of extensive and spirited discussion throughout the week-long meeting.
Members of the non-commercial user’s constituency were the most outspoken against the recommendations in general, calling for more detailed information and more precise descriptions of the types of abuse being targeted in the recommendations. On the other hand, The Government Advisory Committee (GAC) reported that it’s members benefited from the IRT briefings and the GAC believes that these are important issues that deserve focused attention to be resolved prior to the posting of the third version of the Draft Applicant Guidebook. Details of the presentations as well as a full transcript of the session are available by clicking here.
Summaries of Topic Discussions
The IP clearing house and IP claims concepts received strong support overall. As expected, there were many questions focused around who would create, operate and manage the clearing house and where the funding will come from. There were also discussions around other potential uses of the comprehensive database, and developing controls to ensure that the data wouldn’t be used for other than the intended purposes.
The proposed Globally Protected Marks List for protection of highly recognized names didn’t receive substantial support. The perception was such a list only benefits large businesses and offered no real benefit to the rest. Further, any minimum criteria likely would generate complaints from those who just miss making the list regardless.
The Universal Rapid Suspension System drew substantial criticism. More than a few saw the proposal as a replacement for the existing UDRP process. Several questioned the timing and mechanisms for notifying registrants of a dispute prior to a domain name being suspended. A number of opponents suggested considering URS elements as part of an overall review of the UDRP process. Ultimately there appeared to be a general willingness of agreement to improve the current dispute processes to assure mis-use by either respondents or complainants is avoided. The discussions between those for and against the URS made it clear that more detailed examples and cases of how the current system is being abused would help explain the reasoning for particular suggested changes.
ICANN is running further public forums to facilitate on-going discussions with the Internet community regarding workable solutions to some of the outstanding, overarching issues, particularly trademark protection and malicious behaviour. The forums will be in New York on July 13, London on July 15, Hong Kong 24 July, and Abu-Dhabi (tbd).
In advance of the organization’s June 24 meeting in Sydney AU, ICANN has published an analysis of the public comments to Version 2 of the Applicant Guidebook. The 214 page document lists a summary of comments by topic and ICANN’s analysis of the topic and proposed position. Click here to go directly to the document.
A number of key issues within the current applicant guidebook are yet to be resolved, but many proposed changes have been made and are now available for review and comment. The public review and comment period to the Revised Excerpts and Additional Explanatory Material on the changes opened on 31 May 2009 and extends through 20 July 2009.
Publication of the third, revised draft of the guidebook is pending resolution of overarching issues which has to happen before the first round of applications can begin. A key outstanding issue is protecting consumers and preventing abuse. A proposed measure that has ICANN support is the publication of a centralized, thick WHOIS database. This is seen almost universally as a way to lessen the burden on brand holders, law enforcement and others by helping to quickly and efficiently curb abuse in new gTLDs. In addition to recommending the thick WHOIS implementation, ICANN acknowledged the need for the development of an efficient mitigation processes at the registrar level and additional fine-tuning of proposed dispute resolution processes.
ICANN outlined plans to conduct consultative meetings on the numerous trademark issues beginning in Sydney in June, and continuing through July in other geographic regions on the effectiveness of proposals in addressing the overarching issues submitted by the IRT and others. The goal of the meetings is to resolve the outstanding issues in order to publish the final Applicant Guidebook in December 2009, allowing the first round of gTLD applications in the first quarter of 2010 as previously proposed. However, ICANN clearly stated there are no plans to launch the process absent resolution of the key outstanding issues.
ICANN’s Sydney meeting will be held 21-26 June 2009.
Click here to access the public comment analysis and the amended guidebook.