Draft Final Report
Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................ 2
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 7
PRINCIPLES.................................................................................................................. 11
TERM OF
REFERENCE ONE: DISCUSSION....................................................... 12
TERM OF REFERENCE TWO: DISCUSSION...................................................... 15
TERM OF
REFERENCE THREE: DISCUSSION.................................................. 26
TERM OF
REFERENCE FOUR: DISCUSSION..................................................... 29
IMPLEMENTATION
GUIDELINES............................................................................. 32
ANNEX ONE
- CONSULTATION............................................................................... 34
ANNEX TWO
– PARTICIPATION TABLE................................................................ 42
ANNEX FOUR
-- REFERENCE MATERIALS......................................................... 50
The Executive Summary sets out, in a high-level form, the principles,
policies and implementation guidelines that the GNSO Council’s Committee on the
introduction of new top level domains has developed through the policy
development process.
Principles:
a) That new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) should
be introduced in an orderly, timely and predictable way.
b) That some new generic top-level domains will be
internationalised domain names (IDNs).
c) That the principal objectives of the introduction
of new top-level domains are to permit market mechanisms to support useful
online identities that permeate international markets as well as to support
competition, innovation and consumer choice.
d) That a set of technical criteria for a new gTLD
registry applicant be used to minimise the risk of harming the operational
stability, security and global interoperability of the Internet.
e) That a set
of business capability criteria for a new gTLD registry applicant be used to
provide an assurance that an applicant has the capability to meets its business
ambitions.
Term of Reference One: Policy Recommendation:
Term of Reference 1: Whether to introduce new top level domains
Additional new generic top-level domains should be introduced and work should
proceed to enable the introduction of new generic top-level domains, taking
into account the recommendations found in the following sections
Term of Reference Two: Selection
Criteria – String Criteria
i)
Strings
should not be confusingly similar to an existing top level domain
ii)
Strings
should not infringe the legal rights of others
iii)
Strings
should not cause any technical instability
iv)
Strings
should not be a Reserved Word[1]
v)
Strings
should not be contrary to public policy (as set out in advice from the
Governmental Advisory Committee)
TOR 2: Selection Criteria –
Applicant Criteria
vi)
Applicants
should be able to demonstrate their technical capability
vii)
Applicants
should be able to demonstrate their financial and operational capability
TOR 2: Selection Criteria – Process Conditions
viii)There will be a clear and
pre-published process using objective and measurable criteria
ix)
There
will be a base contract provided to applicants at the beginning of the process
x)
Staff
will be used to make preliminary determinations about applications as part of a
process which includes the use of expert panels to make decisions
xi)
Dispute
resolution and challenge processes will be established prior to the start of
the process
Term of Reference Three: Allocation Methods
i)
Applications
will be assessed in rounds
ii)
Applications
for strings will be published after the closing date
iii)
If
there is contention for strings
(1)
Applicants
may resolve contention between themselves within a pre-established timeframe
(2)
If
there is no mutual agreement, a process will be put in place to enable
efficient resolution of contention
(3)
The
ICANN Board may be used to make a final decision, using advice from staff and
expert panels
Term of Reference Four: Policies
for Contractual Conditions
i.
A
base contract will be provided as part of the Request For Proposal
ii.
The
initial term should be a commercially reasonable length
iii.
There
should be renewal expectancy
iv.
A
clear compliance and sanctions process should be set out in the base contract
which could lead to contract termination
v.
Registries
will be required to apply existing Consensus Policies[2] and commit to adopting new
Consensus Polices as they are developed
vi.
If
an applicant offers an IDN service, then ICANN’s IDN guidelines must be
followed
vii.
Registries
will be required to use ICANN accredited registrars
Implementation guidelines:
i)
There
will be a cost-recovery based application fee and application fees may differ
for applicants
ii)
First
come first served within the round for processing order only between rounds and
for an ongoing process if applicable
iii)
Applications
will be time and date stamped
iv)
The
application submission date will be at least four months after the issue of the
Request for Proposal
v)
ICANN
will promote the opening of the application round
vi)
The
application round will close at least thirty days after the start date
vii)
An
applicant granted a TLD string must use it within an appropriate timeframe.
viii)The base contract should balance
market certainty and flexibility for ICANN to accommodate a rapidly changing
market place
ix)
ICANN
should take a consistent approach to the establishment of registry fees
x)
The
use of personal data is limited to the purpose for which it is collected
1) This is an updated draft Final Report from the GNSO Council’s
Committee on the introduction of new top level domains. This version incorporates
commentary from the GNSO’s public forum on new top level domains held at the
ICANN Sao Paulo meeting[3]. The meeting included a further phase in the
ongoing consultations with ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee on public
policy principles for new top level domains[4].
2) The 14 November 2006 draft Final Report was released in conjunction
with the ICANN Staff Discussion Points[5]
document that set out a wide range of further questions and commentary on the
Committee’s draft recommendations. The
consultations and negotiations around the impact of the issues raised by ICANN
staff have been incorporated into an intensive and ongoing implementation
process and are manifest here in an updated set of recommendations which take
account of the Committee’s response to the staff input.
3) Additional comments were received on
the 14 November 2006 draft Constituencies and observers which are referenced
below and which have been incorporated, where possible, into this draft.[6]
4) The major changes captured in this
version of the Report are to re-emphasise the Committee’s key
principles that reflect ICANN’s Mission and Core Values; clarification of the
Committee’s draft policy recommendations and the further explanation of the
Committee’s implementation guidelines which are designed to assist ICANN staff
to implement the policy recommendations in a transparent and cohesive manner.
5) The Report sets out the key findings from a multi-phase,
multi-stakeholder policy development process that has taken place during 2006
and which will continue through 2007.
The Committee have been guided by the GNSO’s policy development process
requirements which are part of ICANN’s ByLaws[7].
6) In each of the sections below the
Committee’s recommendations are discussed in more detail with an explanation of
the rationale for the decisions. The
recommendations have been the subject
of numerous public comment periods and intensive discussion across a range of
stakeholders including ICANN’s GNSO Constituencies, ICANN Supporting
Organisations and Advisory Committees and members of the broader Internet-using
public that is interested in ICANN’s work[8]. In particular, detailed work has been
conducted through the Internationalised Domain Names Working Group (IDN-WG)[9] and
the Reserved Names Working Group (RN-WG)[10] to
comprehensively examine important elements of new TLDs. A working group to examine the protection of
the rights of others (PRO-WG) is being formed with a draft statement of work
yet to be implemented[11]. Each of these additional groups are due to
complete their work prior to ICANN’s March 2007 meeting in Portugal.
7) The GNSO Committee has conducted fo