New gTLDs bring back tiered renewal pricing

Only one mass-market TLD used it, and it’s often considered a bad idea, but variable pricing for domain name renewals is making a comeback with the launch of new gTLDs.
What Box? and Plan Bee are the first two new gTLD registries to start selling domains with tiered renewal fees, in .menu and .build respectively, via Go Daddy.
If you pay Go Daddy $189.99 for a “Priority Rre-registration” in .build, your annual renewal fee if you secure the name will be be $149.99, instead of the $99.99 other pre-registrants will pay.
Similarly, a Priority Pre-registration in .menu will set you back $199.99 a year, forever, instead of $49.99.
I understand that the standard Go Daddy initial registration fee for these two TLDs during general availability will also be $99.99 and $49.99 respectively.
The other two new gTLDs with announced pricing, .uno and .luxury, do not appear to be charging tiered rates.
Go Daddy confirmed that the renewal pricing will be permanently higher in the .build and .menu, telling us:

The industry is starting to move toward a tiered pricing system. As such, some registries have elected to make renewals higher on domain names captured during the priority pre-registration period.

It’s actually permitted under ICANN’s standard Registry Agreement.
Generally, the RA prevents registries charging variable renewal fees. If you find yourself running a successful business in a new gTLD, the registry is not allowed to gouge you for higher renewals.
There’s a provision in section 2.10 of the contract that is designed to “prohibit abusive and/or discriminatory Renewal Pricing practices imposed by Registry Operator”.
But the rule does not apply if you’re told at the point of registration that your renewal pricing will be higher.
The contract states that “Registry Operator must have uniform pricing for renewals of domain name registrations”, but grants this huge exception:

if the registrar has provided Registry Operator with documentation that demonstrates that the applicable registrant expressly agreed in its registration agreement with registrar to higher Renewal Pricing at the time of the initial registration of the domain name following clear and conspicuous disclosure of such Renewal Pricing to such registrant

The only major TLD to try variable pricing before now was .tv, which Verisign currently operates.
The .tv registry held back thousands of desirable strings when it launched in 2000. Instead of auctioning them, it priced these names to sell, but with renewal prices matching the initial registration fee.
If you bought a premium .tv name 10 years ago for $10,000, you’ve been paying $10,000 a year ever since.
This proved very unpopular — especially with domain investors, who continue to moan about the high carrying cost of .tv names bought years ago — and Verisign scrapped the policy on new registrations in 2010.
Some say tiered renewal pricing is the main reason .tv isn’t nearly as popular as it arguably should be.
But will it work in 2014?
Tiered renewal fees seems like an excellent way to discourage domainers from participating in your launch.
Would you be willing to pay higher renewal fees ad infinitum just for the chance for first dibs on the new gTLD domain name you want?

Nine Donuts gTLDs delegated

Donuts has had a batch of nine new gTLDs delegated to the DNS root today.
The nine strings are: .ventures, .camera, .clothing, .lighting, .singles, .voyage, .guru, .holdings and .equipment.
All belong to various Donuts subsidiaries that have signed Registry Agreements with ICANN over the last few months.
At this precise moment it does not seem that any have their basic “nic.” second-level domains active and resolving, but all are appearing in the DNS root zone.
Earlier today, Donuts announced the sunrise dates for the first seven gTLDs in its portfolio.
The company already has one gTLD delegated, the Chinese-script version of “.games”.

Donuts puts date to first Sunrise, signs big registrars, says it won’t have a landrush

Donuts has announced the dates of its first Sunrise periods and revealed that it’s not planning to run a landrush period for its first seven new gTLDs.
The company said today that it plans to take .bike, .clothing, .guru, .holdings, .plumbing, .singles and .ventures to Sunrise on November 26.
It’s opted for a 60-day Sunrise period, going to full general availability on January 29 next year. The company said:

Donuts will forego a traditional land-rush and move directly to general availability to all registrants on January 29, 2014. Donuts’ gTLDs are available for registration by anyone without restriction.

Donuts also said it has signed the following registrars to its channel: GoDaddy, 1&1 Internet, Web.com, Tucows, Host Europe Group, Key-Systems, CSC Digital Brand Services, MarkMonitor, NetNames, Gandi, united-domains, Melbourne IT and 101domain.
While the press release issued this afternoon suggests that the seven strings in question have already been delegated, I’m not seeing them in the DNS root zone yet.

.sexy and .uno raise the average collisions list size

The third batch of new gTLD collisions lists has been released by ICANN, raising the average number of domains that registries are being told to block on extremely cautious security grounds.
The average number of second-level domains to be blocked per gTLD is now 1,904, largely due to the impact of very large lists for .uno (which has 8,187) and .sexy (6,560), which were published yesterday.
This number is only going to get bigger as more cool-sounding Latin-script gTLDs raise the average.
It will be tempered somewhat by the IDN gTLDs, however. The average list for IDNs has only 253 names on it, based on the five published so far.
The most popular strings, ranked by the number of gTLDs’ lists in which they show up (out of a possible 18), are:
[table id=15 /]
There are 30,581 unique second-level strings in total, all of which are fully cross-referenced and searchable at DI PRO.
The most-blocked exact-match brands so far are Yahoo and Google, which both appear on 10 lists. Apple, Facebook and YouTube appear as exact matches on eight.

dotShabaka Diary — Day 23, Wrap-up and Top Tips

We’re wrapping up the dotShabaka Diary series today with this, the final entry from general manager Yasmin Omer.
It’s been an interesting ride, and I thank Yasmin and the dotShabaka team for the time and effort they’ve put into sharing their experiences with DI readers.

Tuesday 5 November 2013
After four months of journal entries, the dotShabaka Registry Diary is wrapping up today following the delegation of شبكة. and official commencement of Sunrise.
The journey has been long and challenging at times. After all the blood, sweat and tears, I strongly believe our experience will be to the benefit of other applicants to follow.
Along the way we experienced the joys of passing pre-delegation testing and commencing Sunrise, but we also documented the lows of name collisions and difficulties in writing a Registry Registrar Agreement.
Throughout the journey it was helpful to receive feedback and comments from the community supporting our cause. This dialogue helped get us to where we are today and a special thank you must be made to IBM’s TMCH team, ICANN, the Pre-Delegation Testing team at IIS (and the PDT Helpdesk) and the many Registrars who have connected with us along the way. Also, a big thank you to Domain Incite and Kevin Murphy for making this journal series possible.
As our delegation journey comes to an end, our TLD launch strategy begins. We have strong ambitions for شبكة. to be the centre of all things Arabic online and we encourage you to continue to watch our progress via our website.
As a parting message, below are our top five tips for other applicants:
1. Communication
Communication is vitally important throughout the process. Be prepared for important emails at any time of the day. When in doubt, always clarify with ICANN and your advisors first. If you are not sure ask ICANN through the CSC portal and if you don’t get a good answer from ICANN ask again through the CSC portal.
2. Seamless integration with RSP
Ensure you have open lines of communication with your Registry Services provider to avoid hiccups and delays. We received technical communications that should have been intended for ARI Registry Services, but our close working relationship with them helped ensure a smooth process.
3. Sort out your product and strategy
Registrar community, potential Registrants, media and interest groups will want information about your TLD. Be ready to describe your TLD, the primary market, eligibility, the launch strategy and other key information.
4. Expect the unexpected
This goes without saying, especially in the ICANN ecosystem. Be flexible and prepare for the worst.
5. The ICANN interface is improving
We understand that many of the frustrations with ICANN occurred because we were the first, and we were pushing hard to go to market. However, it is improving. ICANN are now sending a media kit and hopefully one day someone will get a Welcome Pack.
Good luck to all the other applicants, we’ll be closely watching your progress through delegation.
Regards
Yasmin Omer
General Manager
dotShabaka Registry

Read the full series here.

dotShabaka Diary — Day 22, Sunrise has gone live!

In this penultimate entry in the dotShabaka Diary series, dotShabaka general manager Yasmin Omer officially announces the launch of the Sunrise period for شبكة., the first new gTLD to enter this phase.

Saturday 2 November 2013
It’s with great pleasure that I can finally say that we are the first new gTLD Registry Operator to commence its Sunrise Period! I’m truly excited about taking this TLD to the Arabic speaking world and revolutionising their Internet experience. So what’s happened since the last entry?
We received, and responded to, the TLD on-boarding Information Request from ICANN. New gTLD Registry Operators (and their Registry Services Providers) should be prepared to promptly provide ICANN with technical information regarding:

• The Registry Operator’s provision of the zone file access service;
• Bulk thin registration data access to ICANN;
• Data Escrow – Registry Reporting Interface;
• Implementation of the URS system;
• EPP extensions for the TLD; and
• EPP SLA Monitoring.

We requested the registration of our IDN Table on the IANA Repository of IDN Practices.
We obtained approval of our TLD Startup Information from ICANN. It’s certainly clear from our interactions with ICANN that the process of, and the requirements for, obtaining IBM’s acceptance of Sunrise dates and ICANN’s approval of TLD Startup Information, is yet to be defined. As a result, there was a delay in obtaining ICANN’s approval of our TLD Startup Information.
If you’re a new gTLD Registry Operator and you want your TLD Startup Information approved quickly, here are some tips:

• Once you have a fair idea of when your Sunrise will commence (could be before you’re delegated), reach out to IBM independently and request a number of potential dates. The team at IBM has been very responsive by promptly accepting our Sunrise dates.
• Include your eligibility policy for general registration with your TLD Startup Information. Yes, ICANN has explicitly stated that this is not a requirement they have imposed but it seems that they need it.
• Remember that ICANN’s review is a legal review. Ensure that your policies very clearly demonstrate your compliance with the relevant requirements. Use diagrams.
• Be prepared to respond to ICANN or IBM at any time – they’re both on opposite sides of the world to each other. ICANN thankfully ensure that the process is interactive, so be prepared to interact.

Good luck to everyone. We look forward to being joined by many more New gTLD Registry Operators in Sunrise.

Read previous and future diary entries here.

Two dot-brands pass Extended Evaluation

ICANN did not have much to report in this week’s batch of new gTLD evaluation results, as that stage of the program gradually winds down.
Two dot-brands — Shaw Cablesystems and TUI — passed Extended Evaluation for their .shaw and .tui applications.
TUI had to secure permission from Burkina Faso for .tui, which matches the protected name of one of its provinces, while Shaw had to provide better financial statements to pass.
Only four applications remain in Initial Evaluation — .pwc, .bbb, .kosher and .search. Eight applications are currently in Extended Evaluation.

Four more new gTLD contracts signed, including .email

Four new gTLD registries signed their contracts with ICANN yesterday.
Donuts added Registry Agreements for .email and .codes to its portfolio, bringing its total up to 43.
CORE Association signed for بازار., which means “bazaar”. It’s CORE’s third and final RA as an applicant and its only Arabic application. It’s already live with two Cyrillic strings.
Finally, DotBerlin signed its contract for the city TLD .berlin, apparently confirming the rumor that the one it signed on stage alongside .wien at the newdomains.org conference earlier this week was in fact a prop.
According to the DI PRO database, ICANN now has contracts with 80 new gTLDs and 18 legacy gTLDs.

Famous Four vows to fight .sport objection loss

Famous Four Media has promised to pursue “all available legal avenues” after losing a Community Objection over the .sport gTLD to its Olympic-backed rival.
The portfolio applicant lost out to SportAccord in an October 23 decision by International Chamber of Commerce panelist Guido Santiago Tawil, meaning its .sport application should be rejected by ICANN.
But Famous Four says it’s not over yet. In a statement today, the company said:

Famous Four Media shall pursue rigorously all available legal avenues available to it to have the decision independently reviewed by ICANN and/or others as the case may be, and reversed.

The logical first step of such a threat would be a Reconsideration Request, a relatively cheap way to challenge an ICANN decision with a virtually zero chance of succeeding.
That could be followed by a demand for an Independent Review Panel procedure, which would take much longer and cost significantly more. When ICM Registry won an IRP, the bill ran to millions.
Or Famous Four could try its luck in the courtroom, which could be flustered by the fact that all new gTLD applicants had to sign fairly one-sided legal waivers when they applied.
So what’s the company so worked up about?
It’s lost the chance to run .sport, because the ICC panelist ruled that SportAccord, which is backed by the International Olympic Committee and dozens of official sporting associations, represents the “sport” community and would be harmed if Famous Four were to run the TLD.
Famous Four had argued in its defense that SportAccord can only purport to represent a “subset” of this community — its sporting organization members — rather than everyone who has an interest in sport.
Rather amusingly, in its statement today, FFM linked to the IOC’s own marketing, which bears the slogan “Sport Belongs to All”, to prove its point:

it is Famous Four Media’s unshakable belief that this statement is true and just and that is why Famous Four Media applied for an open TLD – a top level domain that is open to everyone and offered to everyone on a level and equitable basis. Trying to claim ownership and representation of sport is akin to claiming representation for the human race.

An alternative reading would be to state that the IOC’s marketing slogan is, like all marketing slogans, bullshit.
But it actually cuts to the heart of the case itself, which Guido Santiago Tawil found in favor of SportAccord, writing:

The ICANN Guidebook does not require that an “entire” community agree on an objection to an application. In fact, it would be almost impossible for an institution to represent any community as a whole. If such was the requirement, there would be no reason to provide for the possibility of community objections.
It is difficult to imagine which other association may claim representation of the Sport Community besides an institution that represents, as Objector does, more than a hundred well-known sports federations and institutions related to sports.

Another key, and related, factor Community Objection panelists have to consider is whether a community is “clearly delineated”.
It’s here where the arguments that an applicant can use to win a Legal Rights Objection seem to fail under Community Objection scrutiny.
Famous Four said that “sport” is not clearly delineated along the lines defined by SportAccord — ie, members of its federations — because it doesn’t allow, say, hobbyists or the media to get involved.
Similar arguments were made in LROs.
Applicants regularly defended themselves against LROs — where the objector owns a trademark rather than purporting to represent a community — by pointing out all the non-infringing uses of the string.
That defense apparently doesn’t work in Community Objections, with the .sport ICC panelist ruling:

The fact that the media (which may constitute a different community) or viewers are unable to be part of this association is irrelevant to consider Objector as a delineated community. Otherwise, no community could be recognized under the ICANN gTLD proceedings since it would be easy for any Applicant to find secondary or not closed-related members outside of it.

In its response to the ruling today, FFM called this a “non sequitur”, adding:

It is not difficult to conceive of communities which are exclusive, and in all cases these do not consist of generic words like “sport.” One example already given by other commentators might be “.yorkuniversity.”

Another key pivot point in the .sport decision is “detriment”.
Objectors have to prove the “likelihood of material detriment to the rights or legitimate interests of a significant portion of the community to which the string may be explicitly or implicitly targeted.”
The panelist in this case chose to interpret this as “future ‘possible’ damage”, which he said was quite a low bar.
His reasoning, in finding that detriment to SportAccord was likely, seems to hinge quite a bit on the fact that SportAccord has also applied for the same gTLD.
While seemingly discarding “hypothetical” arguments about cybersquatting and such in an open-registration .sport gTLD, he said he “shares Objector’s argument that all domain registrations in a community-based ‘.sport’ gTLD will assure sports acceptable use policies.”
That thinking only works, I think, if you also have a community-based .sport application on the table.
As FFM characterized it today: “What he is in effect saying is that the .SPORT gTLD should be delegated: just not to dot Sport Limited. This was not his decision to make.”
This week at the newdomains.org conference in Munich I spoke to several people who believe some of the highly contested, super-premium new gTLDs will take years to resolve.
It seems that .sport is going to be one of those.
Under the ICANN rules, FFM is supposed to withdrawn its application now. That’s clearly not going to happen.

Three gTLD Community Objections rejected

International Chamber of Commerce panelists have recently rejected three Community Objections against new gTLD applications.
The dismissals include objections to the controversial Turkey-based bids for .islam and .halal, filed by Asia Green IT System, which had raised the ire of the United Arab Emirates’ telecommunications regulator.
The UAE’s Telecommunications Regulatory Authority — also the operator of its ccTLDs — said it was representing the wider Islamic community under orders from the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.
But ICC panelist Bernardo Cremades ruled, based on a close reading of the OIC’s letter to the TRA and other member states, that the OIC had not formally backed the objection.
While there were over 100 public comments objecting to .islam and over 70 to .halal, because the TRA merely referred to them rather than submitting copies as evidence, the panelist chose to ignore them completely.
He also noted that only the UAE has chosen to file a formal objection.
So Cremades ruled that there was no “substantial opposition” to the applications, which is one of the things objectors need to prove in order to win an objection.
The TRA also failed to persuade the panelist that there was “a likelihood of any material detriment” to the Muslim community if Asia Green’s gTLDs were to be delegated, writing:

The Objector has certainly not provided any evidence that the Respondent is not acting or does not intend to act in accordance with the interests of the Muslim community.

So the TRA’s objections were dismissed and the applicant can proceed to the next phase of the new gTLD program.
Also dismissed recently was Bundesverband der Deutschen Tourismuswirtschaft’s objection to Donuts’ application for .reisen (“travel” in German).
BTW, a German travel industry association, is associated with a competing bid for .reise. Weirdly, it did not file a String Confusion Objection against Donuts’ .reisen.
It had argued among other things that German speakers would expect .reisen to conform to German and European consumer protection laws, while Donuts is planning an open and unrestricted gTLD.
The ICC panelist didn’t buy that argument, noting that a hotel in Argentina could market itself as German-speaking without having to abide by, say, European data protection law.
He also ruled that BTW showed substantial opposition from the commercial sector of German-language travel agents, but not from other sections of the community such as individual travelers.
Finally, he ruled that Donuts had promised to put enough protection mechanisms in place to mean there was unlikely to be a detriment to the .reisen community.
The objection was dismissed.