ICANN's Answers to Sub-Committee Members' Inquiries:
← Older revision
Revision as of 14:46, 24 September 2012
(2 intermediate revisions by one user not shown)
Line 295:
Line 295:
===ICANN's Answers to Sub-Committee Members' Inquiries===
===ICANN's Answers to Sub-Committee Members' Inquiries===
−
On January 5, 2012, Cong. Greg Walden, Chairman of the House Sub-Committee on Communications and Technology sent a letter to ICANN requesting answers to
the questions of some members of the sub-committee on
some issues related to the new gTLD program including:
[[http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/pritz-to-walden-20jan12-en.pdf ICANN's Response to Cong. Greg Walden]
+
On January 5, 2012, Cong. Greg Walden, Chairman of the House Sub-Committee on Communications and Technology
,
sent a letter to ICANN requesting answers to some issues related to the new gTLD program including:
[[http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/pritz-to-walden-20jan12-en.pdf ICANN's Response to Cong. Greg Walden]
−
* '''Process used by ICANN in achieving consensus through the [[Multistakeholder Model|multistakeholder
'''
model]] ICANN explained that consensus was achieved through community-driven policy development processes wherein working teams composed of members of the different internet stakeholders developed reports and recommendations and the public were given the opportunity to comment. The public comments were considered
in
drafting the final report and recommendations before
submitting
it to the appropriate organization within ICANN such as the [[GNSO]] Council, which
is responsible presenting it
to the ICANN Board
for consideration
. ICANN emphasized that the GNSO Council is composed of all internet stakeholders and voted 19-1 in favor of the new gTLD policy. The internet governing body also pointed out that ICANN's Advisory
Committee's
([[GAC]], [[ALAC]], [[SSAC]], [[RSSAC]] etc.) were involved in the
cosensus policy
development.ICANN reiterated the statement of Sec. [[Lawrence Strickling|Larry Strickling]] that the ICANN ''"multistakeholder does not guarantee that everyone will be satisfied with the outcome.But it is critical to preserving the model of
internet
governance that has been so successful to date that all parties respect and work through the process and accept the outcome once a decision is reached..."''
+
* '''Process used by ICANN in achieving consensus through the [[Multistakeholder Model|multistakeholder model]]
'''
+
ICANN explained that consensus was achieved through community-driven policy development processes wherein working teams composed of members of the different internet stakeholders developed reports and recommendations and the public were given the opportunity to comment. The public comments were considered
when
drafting the final report and recommendations
,
before
they were submitted
it to the appropriate organization within ICANN such as the [[GNSO]] Council, which
would in turn present their findings
to the ICANN Board. ICANN emphasized that the GNSO Council is composed of all internet stakeholders and voted 19-1 in favor of the new gTLD policy. The internet governing body also pointed out that ICANN's Advisory
Committees
([[GAC]], [[ALAC]], [[SSAC]], [[RSSAC]] etc.) were involved in the
consensus
development. ICANN reiterated the statement of Sec. [[Lawrence Strickling|Larry Strickling]] that the ICANN ''"multistakeholder does not guarantee that everyone will be satisfied with the outcome.But it is critical to preserving the model of
Internet
governance that has been so successful to date that all parties respect and work through the process and accept the outcome once a decision is reached..."''
* '''Rights Protection Mechanisms'''
* '''Rights Protection Mechanisms'''
−
ICANN informed the Congress that rights protection mechanisms will be implemented according to the project plan included in the [[Applicant Guidebook]].
Rights protection will be implemented in the first and second level domain names. The internet governing body mentioned the development of the Trademark
Clearing House
as one of the rights protection mechanisms and it is mandatory to all new TLDs.
+
Rights protection will be implemented in the first and second level domain names. The internet governing body mentioned the development of the
[[
Trademark
Clearinghouse]]
as one of the rights protection mechanisms and it is mandatory to all new TLDs.
* '''Request for a Second Round of Application'''
* '''Request for a Second Round of Application'''
−
ICANN stated that it is committed
in
conducting additional rounds of new gTLD applications and it is working on determining
the next
schedule.
+
ICANN stated that it is committed
to
conducting additional rounds of new gTLD applications and it is working on determining
that
schedule.
* '''Transparency regarding Surplus Funds generated from the new gTLD applications'''
* '''Transparency regarding Surplus Funds generated from the new gTLD applications'''
−
ICANN emphasized that it is committed
in
using the excess funds generated from the new gTLD applications to advance its missions in a transparent way such as allocating funds to projects that are of interest to the greater
internet
community.
+
ICANN emphasized that it is committed
to
using the excess funds generated from the new gTLD applications to advance its missions in a transparent way
,
such as allocating funds to projects that are of interest to the greater
Internet
community.
* '''Bilateral Negotiations with registrars about the twelve Law Enforcement Due Diligence Recommendations'''
* '''Bilateral Negotiations with registrars about the twelve Law Enforcement Due Diligence Recommendations'''
ICANN confirmed that it is conducting negotiations with its accredited registrars regarding the 12 recommendations of the enforcement agencies. Updates to the negotiation are available [https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Registrars+to+Amend+the+Registrar+Accreditation+Agreement '''here''']
ICANN confirmed that it is conducting negotiations with its accredited registrars regarding the 12 recommendations of the enforcement agencies. Updates to the negotiation are available [https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Registrars+to+Amend+the+Registrar+Accreditation+Agreement '''here''']
* '''Contingency Plan in case a registry operator goes out of business'''
* '''Contingency Plan in case a registry operator goes out of business'''
−
ICANN told the Congress that an "Emergency
Back-end
Registry Operator" (
[[
EBERO
]]
) is in place to take-over the operations if a failed registry to ensure that the interest of domain name registrants are protected.
+
ICANN told the Congress that an "
[[EBERO|
Emergency
Backend
Registry Operator
]]
" (EBERO) is in place to take-over the operations if a failed registry to ensure that the interest of domain name registrants are protected.
* '''[[Applicant Support Program]] (ASP)'''
* '''[[Applicant Support Program]] (ASP)'''
−
ICANN explained that information regarding the new Applicant Support Program is available
in the new gTLD Financial Assistance Handbook. The
two types of financial assistance under ASP
include
a reduced application fee of $47,000 from $185,000 and
applicants are allowed
to
pay
the $185,000 application fee
through a payment plan
. To qualify for financial assistance, entities must meet
the required
criteria. Financial Assistance applications will be evaluated by an independent [[SARP|Support Application Review Panel]] (SARP).
+
ICANN explained that information regarding the new Applicant Support Program is available
, which offers
two types of financial assistance under ASP
:
a reduced application fee of $47,000 from $185,000
,
and
a payment plan
to
deal with
the
whole
$185,000 application fee. To qualify for financial assistance, entities must meet
certain
criteria. Financial Assistance applications will be evaluated by an independent [[SARP|Support Application Review Panel]] (SARP).
* '''[[Trademark Clearinghouse]]'''
* '''[[Trademark Clearinghouse]]'''
−
ICANN explained that the Trademark Clearinghouse is a database of registered trademarks and other types intellectual property rights, which
shall
be used to provide protection
during the start-up phase of the program
during the "Sunrise" and "Trademark Claims" processes
and the
60-days post launch operation of the Trademark Claims exceeds the final recommendation of the [[Special Trademark Issues]] (STI) team, which was involved in developing the service and suggested that no mandatory post-launch claims service is necessary.
+
ICANN explained that the Trademark Clearinghouse is a database of registered trademarks and other types
[[Intellectual Property|
intellectual property
]]
rights, which
will
be used to provide protection during the "
[[
Sunrise
]]
" and "Trademark Claims" processes
. ICANN notes that
60-days post launch operation of the Trademark Claims exceeds the final recommendation of the [[Special Trademark Issues]] (STI) team, which was involved in developing the service and suggested that no mandatory post-launch claims service is necessary.
* '''Possibility of subsidizing the costs of Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) using surplus funds'''
* '''Possibility of subsidizing the costs of Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) using surplus funds'''
−
ICANN clarified that no commitment has been regarding the use of surplus funds and the issue is a matter of continued community consultations. ICANN will consider the proposal to subsidize costs of disputes under the UDRP.
+
ICANN clarified that no commitment has been
made
regarding the use of surplus funds and
that
the issue is a matter of continued community consultations. ICANN will consider the proposal to subsidize costs of disputes under the UDRP.
* '''Thick [[Whois]] System'''
* '''Thick [[Whois]] System'''
−
ICANN is dedicated
in
improving the access and accuracy of the Whois information
and the
Thick Whois will be
mandated to
all new gTLDs. Five studies regarding Whois services focusing on issues related to misuse, registrant identification, privacy and proxy services
are being
conducted.
+
ICANN is dedicated
to
improving the access and accuracy of the
[[
Whois
]]
information
;
Thick Whois
information requirements
will be
in place for
all new gTLDs. Five studies regarding Whois services focusing on issues related to misuse, registrant identification, privacy and proxy services
were
conducted.
* '''New gTLD Application Fee'''
* '''New gTLD Application Fee'''
−
ICANN provided a breakdown of the current $185,000 application fee which
include
development costs ($26,950 per
applcation
), applications processing and evaluation costs ($97,800 per application), costs for risk mitigation steps
etc.
($60,000 per applicant). Further breakdown of the cost is available [http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new--gtlds/cost--considerations--04oct09--en.pdf.'''here''']
+
ICANN provided a breakdown of the current $185,000 application fee
,
which
includes
development costs ($26,950 per
application
), applications processing and evaluation costs ($97,800 per application), costs for risk mitigation steps ($60,000 per applicant). Further breakdown of the cost is available [http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new--gtlds/cost--considerations--04oct09--en.pdf.'''here''']
* '''Revenue from second level domain name registrations under new gTLDs'''
* '''Revenue from second level domain name registrations under new gTLDs'''
ICANN said that it did not evaluate any additional revenue that might be generated from defensive second level domain name registrations. Registries are required to pay ICANN with annual fees with fixed components.
ICANN said that it did not evaluate any additional revenue that might be generated from defensive second level domain name registrations. Registries are required to pay ICANN with annual fees with fixed components.
* '''Cost recovery model in assessing fees'''
* '''Cost recovery model in assessing fees'''
−
The cost-neutral model was a direct response to the GNSO policy recommendation that application fees are designed to ensure that the implementation of the new gTLD program is self funding. Once the TLDs are operational, transaction based fees for registries and registrars will apply
on registrations of new
domain
names under new gTLDs
.
+
The cost-neutral model was a direct response to the GNSO policy recommendation that application fees are designed to ensure that the implementation of the new gTLD program is self funding. Once the TLDs are operational, transaction based fees for registries and registrars will apply
to
domain
registrations
.
* '''Loser pays system against cybersquatting'''
* '''Loser pays system against cybersquatting'''
−
The new gTLD dispute resolution under the new gTLD program implements the loser pays system. The [[IRT]] did not recommend full loser pays system for domain name disputes related to cybersquatting. The loser pays system has exceptions on filing fees for disputes and URS claims of less than 15 domain names. Claims for 26 or more names in a URS claims might be done on a loser-pays basis
, which meets the stated goals of the URS to be fast and fair
.
+
The new gTLD dispute resolution under the new gTLD program implements the loser pays system. The [[IRT]] did not recommend
a
full loser pays system for domain name disputes related to
[[
cybersquatting
]]
. The loser pays system has exceptions on filing fees for disputes and URS claims of less than 15 domain names. Claims for 26 or more names in a URS claims might be done on a loser-pays basis.
* '''Auction process for multiple gTLD applicants'''
* '''Auction process for multiple gTLD applicants'''
The auctions process in case of multiple gTLD applicants will be applied as a last resort. ICANN encourage applicants to work on developing a mutually-agreeable solution.
The auctions process in case of multiple gTLD applicants will be applied as a last resort. ICANN encourage applicants to work on developing a mutually-agreeable solution.
Line 328:
Line 329:
The new gTLD program offers heightened protection mechanisms against abuses, registry failure and other malicious conducts designed by intellectual property experts
The new gTLD program offers heightened protection mechanisms against abuses, registry failure and other malicious conducts designed by intellectual property experts
* '''Law Enforcement Community Recommendations'''
* '''Law Enforcement Community Recommendations'''
−
ICANN is actively working on the 12 recommendations of the law enforcement community and negotiating with registrars to amend the Registrar Accreditation Agreement
([[RAA
]]) particularly the inclusion of a more improved and accurate Whois
data
.
+
ICANN is actively working on the 12 recommendations of the law enforcement community and negotiating with registrars to amend the
[[
Registrar Accreditation Agreement]]
(RAA
)
,
particularly the inclusion of a more improved and accurate Whois
database
.
* '''Cost/Benefit Analysis used by ICANN before implementing the new gTLD program'''
* '''Cost/Benefit Analysis used by ICANN before implementing the new gTLD program'''
Five economic studies were commissioned by ICANN to examine the anticipated benefits and costs of the new gTLD program.
Five economic studies were commissioned by ICANN to examine the anticipated benefits and costs of the new gTLD program.