[council] New gTLD Program Makes Available New Documents for Community Discussion

[Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>]

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<http://nbo.icann.org/>. 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<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/discussion-eoi-pre-registration-process-model-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [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)<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-urs-clean-15feb10-en.pdf> 
[PDF, 128 KB]

redline<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-urs-redline-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [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.

View<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201004-en.htm#urs>

TM Clearinghouse 
<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/trademark-clearinghouse-proposal-clean-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 153 KB]

redline<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/trademark-clearinghouse-proposal-redline-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [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.

View<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201004-en.htm#tmc>

Post Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure 
(PPDRP)<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-trademark-pddrp-clean-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 65 KB]

redline<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-trademark-pddrp-redline-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [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.

View<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201004-en.htm#ppdrp>

Registry Restrictions Dispute Resolution Procedure 
(RRDRP)<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-rrdrp-clean-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 61 KB]

redline<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-rrdrp-redline-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [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.

View<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201004-en.htm#rrdrp>

IDN ISSUES

IDN 3 
Character<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/idn-3-char-requirement-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [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.

View<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201004-en.htm#3-char>

IDN 
Variants<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/idn-variants-15feb10-en.pdf> 
[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.

View<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201004-en.htm#variants>

REGISTRY OPERATIONS & AGREEMENT

Bench Marking of Registry Operations 
<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/benchmarking-report-15feb10-en.pdf> 
[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.

View<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201004-en.htm#benchmarking>

Process for gTLD Registry Agreement 
Amendment<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/registry-agreement-amendment-process-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [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.

View<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201004-en.htm#agreement-amendment>




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.
Document

Related Public Forum

Summary & Analysis of Draft Applicant Guidebook, Version 
3<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/summary-analysis-agv3-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 1.13 MB]

http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200911.html#agbv3

Summary & Analysis of GNSO Public Comments on Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) 
and 
Clearinghouse<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/summary-analysis-special-trademarks-issues-report-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 332 KB]

http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201001.htm#sti

Summary of Proposed Rights Protection Mechanims 
<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/summary-analysis-clearinghouse-urs-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 204K]

http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200911.html#prpm-new-gtlds

Summary & Analysis of Expressions of Interest and 
Pre-Registrations<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/summary-analysis-eoi-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 844 KB]

This summary combines the two Public Fora: 11 Dec 2009 to Jan 11 
2009<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200912.htm#eoi-new-gtlds>
 and 17 of Dec 2009 to 26 January 
2010<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201001.htm#draft-eoi>.
 It is important to note that there were comments received past the deadline 
might not be part of the summary analysis, even if they were posted on the 
Forum.

Summary & Analysis of Final Report on Three-Character Requirement and Variant 
Management<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/summary-analysis-3-character-and-variants-15feb10-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 116 KB]


http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201001.htm#3cv-final-report




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<http://nbo.icann.org/>.

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<http://nbo.icann.org/>, staff will hold 
several New gTLD sessions, including:

 *   Program update and a panel discussion regarding the Expressions of 
Interest and Pre-Registrations proposed process;
 *   Trademark Protection;
 *   High Security Top-Level Domains (HSTLD) & Zone File Access Advisory Group 
Meetings;
 *   New gTLD introduction session for new comers.

 The Draft Applicant Guidebook, Version 4 is expected to be published prior to 
the ICANN Brussels Meeting (20-25 June 2010).

Related Resources:

 *   New gTLD Program: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm
 *   Additional information about the HSTLD program, the HSTLD AG and 
recordings of the HSTLD AG meetings can be accessed at the following link: 
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/hstld-program-en.htm
 *   Draft Applicant Guidebook, Version 
3<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-rfp-clean-04oct09-en.pdf> 
[PDF, 1.5 MB]


Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://gnso.icann.org