The following is a lightly edited transcript of an interview between DI PRO and ICANN president and CEO Rod Beckstrom that took place on Sunday, April 29, 2012.

Speaking for the first time since April 12, when ICANN took its TLD Application System offline due to a security bug, Beckstrom addresses the efforts ICANN is making to bring the system back online and discusses the possible timing for the Big Reveal of new gTLD applications.

He also gives some insight into the background of the bug, ICANN’s efforts to test TAS before it went live, ducks questions about the full impact of the problem, and explains why ICANN made the decision to pull the plug on TAS April 12.

Do you have any information that hasn’t been already disclosed in ICANN’s daily updates that you’re happy to discuss now?

Yes there is. For example, I’m going to share the fact that, first as CEO I take full responsibility for the resolution of this issue. And it’s very much my hope… let me just state this: we know this affects applicants, we know it affects various parties and causes concern and causes anxiety because the system is down for a period of time, but we did this because we believe it was the proper thing to do for the safety and security of the program.

As CEO I’d like to see us obviously get the technical issues resolved, notify applicants, reopen the window and publish the strings before I pass the baton in Prague. That’s not a commitment at this point in time, it’s an indication as CEO that it’s absolutely my intention to push for a timely resolution of this issue.

Is that a likely time-line, that we won’t get the Big Reveal until Prague?

I’m not going to commit on probabilities, I think that’s a possibility, what I’m mentioning is my commitment to push this thing forward, providing we can ensure the quality, and try to get things wrapped up by that time. If we can get things done sooner then the sooner the better.

What’s the hold-up?

There are two major streams that are involved here. One is dealing with the software glitch and also software performance enhancements we want to do. The second one has to do with the data analysis and notifying the affected parties.

On the software glitch side we have identified the bug, we believe we have fixed the bug, we have conducted tests and we cannot get the bug to reappear. So we believe the system is stable but we are continuing to test because that’s what we need to do to develop further confidence in tge reliability the of system in this specific aspect. We’re also looking at some very specific changes to enhance system performance. That’s the technical side, on that side the bug’s been fixed we’re in testing mode on that and we’re still evaluating the performance side, which performance tuning choices we need to make.

Why not reopen TAS now and conduct the audit simultaneously?

DomainIncite PRO is excited to reveal the results of the domain name industry’s first in-depth study into how the world’s biggest brands use new generic top-level domains.

In March and April 2012, we surveyed the domain name ownership and usage patterns of the world’s 100 most-valuable brands — representing over $1.2 trillion in brand value, according to Interbrand — in six gTLDs introduced since 2001.

As well as confirming the long-held belief that brand owners see little value in defensive registrations — many not even choosing to benefit from residual traffic — the survey also revealed which brands are more likely to develop their sites, which are most vulnerable to cybersquatting, and which appear to care the least about enforcing their brands.

We also examined how “cybersquatters” use the domain names they register, with some surprising results. Privacy/proxy registration is not nearly as prevalent as many believe, our study found, and a significant portion of registrants have made no effort to monetize the domains they own that match famous brand names.

This extensive, fully illustrated report includes:

• A comparison of defensive registration trends across 100 brands in six new gTLDs. How many domains are owned by the respective brands and how many are owned by third parties? How many are reserved by the registry and how many are still available for registration?
• A breakdown of usage trends by gTLD in .asia, .biz, .info, .jobs, .mobi and .pro. When brand owners register domains in new gTLDs, how likely are they to develop content on those domains, and what can new gTLD registries do to encourage this desirable behavior?
• An analysis of cybersquatting behavior in over 100 domain names registered to entities other than the brand owner. How much do brand owners have to worry about their brands being impaired by damaging behavior such as redirection to competing web sites or adult material?
• Full survey results. DI PRO subscribers have full access to the survey results, which include details of which brand-domains belong to third parties, which exhibit potentially damaging behavior, and which are currently available for registration.

Click here for the full report or learn how to subscribe instantly.

The battle for control of the proposed .eco generic top-level domain has started early, with three rival applicants now locked in trademark infringement litigation in the US.

Planet.eco, easily the quietest of the three known .eco applicants, has sued the other two — DotEco and Big Room — for trademark infringement and cybersquatting, seeking millions of dollars in damages.

The Connecticut-based company has also demanded an injunction preventing DotEco and Big Room from applying to ICANN for the .eco gTLD.

This article provides a comprehensive background to the lawsuit, examines the legitimacy of the trademarks in question and Planet.eco’s credibility, and provides an analysis of the likelihood that the litigation will be successful.

The strength of trademark protection mechanisms in the new gTLD space is always a hot topic at ICANN meetings and Costa Rica was no exception.

At a March 15 panel discussion ostensibly convened to discuss rights protection at the top level, discussions inevitably turned to second-level protections such as the rejected Globally Protected Marks List (GPML) idea instead.

As the application period drew closer, and then opened on January 12 2012, brand owners raised concerns about filing defensive applications to protect their marks. These worries, amplified by elements within the US government, prompted ICANN to open a public comment period to address the “perceived” need to apply defensively.

ICANN 43 hosted the first occasion at which ICANN staff lifted the veil on their proposals for new gTLD application batching.

The method proposed appears to highly favor applicants already skilled in “domaining” techniques such as drop-catching, and was roundly derided by most attendees.