Two new vice presidents at ICANN

ICANN has appointed two new vice presidents to head up its European and Latin American offices.
British former civil servant Nigel Hickson, who ICANN says has experience working in European Union politics, is the new VP for Europe.
Rodrigo de la Parra, the newly appointed VP for Latin America, is an internal promotion. Since January 2011 he has been ICANN’s Regional Liaison for Latin America.
He formerly held senior positions within Mexican telecommunications regulator Cofetel and was Mexico’s representative on ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee.
Both positions are new. The VP of Europe job was originally given to French software executive Thomas Spiller, but he quit before he even started last August.

Comment Tagged: ICANN

GAC gets more power to block controversial gTLDs

While the new version of ICANN’s new generic top-level domains Applicant Guidebook contains mostly tweaks, there’s a pretty big change for those filing “controversial” applications.
The Guidebook now grants the Governmental Advisory Committee greater powers to block gTLD applications based on minority government views.
ICANN has adopted poorly-written, ambiguous text approved by the GAC at its meeting in Dakar last October, which lowers the threshold required to force the ICANN board to consider GAC advice.
The changes essentially mean that it’s now much easier for the GAC to force the ICANN board to the negotiating table if a small number of governments object to a gTLD application.
In the September Guidebook, a GAC consensus objection was needed to force the ICANN board to manually approve controversial applications. Now, it appears that only a single country needs to object.
This is the relevant text:

The GAC advises ICANN that there are concerns about a particular application “dot-example.” The ICANN Board is expected to enter into dialogue with the GAC to understand the scope of concerns. The ICANN Board is also expected to provide a rationale for its decision.

Applications for .gay, of which there are expected to be at least two, will almost certainly fall into this category.
If you’re applying for a potentially controversial gTLD, you can thank the GAC for the fact that your road to approval is now considerably less predictable.
It’s also worth bearing in mind that the GAC is allowed to file an objection based on any aspect of the application – not just the chosen string.
So, for example, if you’re applying for .bank or .pharma and your application falls short of one government’s expected consumer safeguards, you may also see a GAC “concerns” objection.
In cases where the GAC objects to an application, the ICANN board of directors does have the ability to overrule that objection, if it provides its rationale, much as it did with .xxx.
However, .xxx was a special case, and ICANN today is under a regime much friendlier to the GAC and much more nervous about the international political environment than it was 12 months ago.
Make no mistake: GAC Advice on New gTLDs will carry weight.
This table compares the types of GAC Advice described in the Applicant Guidebook published in September with the one published last night.
[table id=5 /]
It should also be noted that since Dakar the GAC has defined consensus as “the practice of adopting decisions by general agreement in the absence of any formal objection”.
In other words, if some GAC members push for a GAC consensus objection against a given gTLD, other GAC members would have to formally object to that proposed objection in order to prevent the minority view becoming consensus.
It’s a pretty low threshold. The .gay applicants, among others, are going to have a nerve-wracking time.

Comment Tagged: .bank, .gay, gac, gac advice, governmental advisory committee, ICANN, new gTLDs, new TLDs, pharma

ICANN opens new gTLD program

It’s scarcely believable given the delays and threats, but ICANN opened its new generic top-level domains program to applications this morning at a minute after midnight UTC.
The TLD Application System, ICANN’s custom web tool for submitting applications, is now live.
If you have $5,000 burning a hole in your pocket, you can sign up for TAS to check it out at any time between now and March 29 at 2359 UTC.
A new English version of the Applicant Guidebook – the ninth – has also been published, mostly merely correcting and clarifying parts of the text.
Applications, with the remaining $180,000 part of the fee, are due by April 12 at 2359 UTC.

Comment Tagged: ICANN, new gTLDs, new TLDs, tas

Whois verification rules coming this year

No more Donald Duck in the Whois?
Registrars could be obliged to verify their customers’ identities when they sell domain names under new rules proposed for later this year, according to ICANN president Rod Beckstrom.
He told National Telecommunications and Information Administration boss Larry Strickling today that the new provisions could make it into the new Registrar Accreditation Agreement by March.
Beckstrom wrote:

ICANN expects that the RAA will incorporate – for the first time – Registrar commitments to verify WHOIS data. ICANN is actively considering incentives for Registrars to adopt the anticipated amendments to the RAA prior to the rollout of the first TLD in 2013.

The RAA is currently being renegotiated by ICANN and the registrar community, following governmental outrage about the RAA at its meeting in Dakar last October.
If new Whois rules are added to the RAA, it will be up to registrars to decide whether to implement them immediately or wait until their existing ICANN contracts expire — hence the need for “incentives”.
Documents ICANN has been posting following its RAA meetings have been less than illuminating, so the letter to Strickling today is the first public insight into what the new contract may contain.
Whois verification, which is often found at the top of the wish-lists of intellectual property and law enforcement communities, is of course hugely controversial.
Civil rights advocates believe that checking registrant identities will infringe on rights to privacy and free speech, while not helping to prevent crime. Actual criminals will of course not hand over their true identities when registering domain names.
The process of verifying Whois data may also wind up making domain names more expensive, due to the costs registrars will incur implementing or subscribing to automated verification systems.
Nevertheless, the anti-new-gTLDs campaign in Washington DC led by the Association of National Advertisers recently led to Whois – a separate issue – being placed firmly on the new gTLDs agenda.
The chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, as well as Strickling, both wrote to ICANN to express concern about the lack of progress on strengthening Whois over the last few years.
Beckstrom’s letter to Strickling can be read here. His reply to FTC chairman Leibowitz – which also schools him in why new gTLDs probably won’t increase fraud – can be read here.

Comment Tagged: ana, ftc, ICANN, new gTLDs, new TLDs, ntia, whois

Introducing DomainIncite PRO

As you know, today is a Big Day in the domain name industry.
That’s right, today’s the day that I’m excited to announce the launch of DomainIncite PRO, the industry’s newest research and analysis service.
DomainIncite PRO is a DI sister site providing in-depth coverage of industry trends, company case studies, and analysis of ICANN’s new generic top-level domains program as it begins to roll out.
I hope the service will quickly become the domain name industry’s premier source of independent research and objective, vendor-neutral analysis.
Let me assure you that regular DI is not going anywhere. This blog will continue to break the latest domain name news, in our unique style, at least five days a week.
While DI will continue to publish shorter news articles, DomainIncite PRO will carry white papers in the 1,500 to 3,000-word range, often accompanied by downloadable data.
Some highlights of the content available to PRO subscribers today:

Five thousand strings that could get your gTLD application rejected
This paper analyzes a wide variety of scenarios in which new gTLD strings could be rejected by ICANN and provides a downloadable spreadsheet of over 5,000 specific banned strings — including brands, abbreviations and generic terms — that could cause an application to fall at the first hurdle.
How .CO Internet relaunched Colombia’s .co registry
This case study looks at .CO Internet’s strategy in the run-up to .co’s launch and during its first year of operations, exploring its successes and failures with regards marketing, sales, channel partnerships and trademark protection.
Domain name sales price database
To help new gTLD applicants with their premium domain name pricing strategies, we’re making available a database of almost 60,000 domain name sales prices that can be used as a helpful pricing reference.

There’s also a free downloadable white paper about new gTLDs written with absolute newbies in mind.
Expect to see a lot more content, with a big focus on new gTLDs, to start appearing soon.
In the near future, DomainIncite PRO will also begin to carry in-depth data-driven market share analysis of the existing gTLD registry space. This coverage will be expanded to cover all new gTLDs when they begin to launch early next year.
We will also provide ongoing analysis of live policy development within ICANN, helping new community members navigate the minefield of acronyms, procedures and personalities.
While translating ICANN into plain English is one of my key goals, make no mistake: DomainIncite PRO is interested in politics only insofar as it affects businesses.
Don’t expect to find long, tedious reports about interminable internet governance debates, unless the outcome is likely to have a tangible impact on somebody’s bottom line.
I can reveal that DomainIncite PRO’s first contributing analyst is Adam Smith, World Trademark Review‘s well-respected former Senior Reporter.
Adam covered the development of the new gTLD program for WTR between 2008 and late 2011. He knows his stuff and I’m very grateful to have him on board.
I hope to add more writers in the near future (if you’re interested in contributing, please get in touch).
Now the bad news. This great content doesn’t come for free.
Memberships are available on an annual subscription basis, and it’s priced for a corporate wallet.
As it’s a new service, and because this post basically represents a “soft” launch for regular DomainIncite readers, the introductory price for single-user annual subscription is $799.
Multi-user company licenses are also available at a discounted rate upon request, but I do not currently anticipate offering trial subscriptions.
I think the content available today already offers a compelling ROI case.
If DomainIncite PRO sounds like something that could benefit your business, why not check it out for yourself right now?

4 Comments Tagged: domainincite pro

SportAccord picks CORE for .sport gTLD bid

SportAccord, an international association of sporting federations, has picked CORE as its registry services provider for its .sport generic top-level domain application.
The organization, which has International Olympic Committee backing, has also confirmed that it will be applying for .sport as a “community” gTLD.
Community applications can avoid a costly auction in the event that their chosen gTLD string is contested and the applicant can meet a rigorous set of community support criteria.
With over 100 international sporting organizations, covering everything from football to tug of war, comprising its membership, SportAccord’s bid should be good for a few points on the Community Priority Evaluation, but success is by no means assured.
The Lausanne, Switzerland-based organization announced its intention to apply for .sport, issuing an RFP, back in September 2011.
I’m aware of at least two other organizations that have publicly announced potential .sport applications.
CORE currently runs the back-end for the .cat and .museum gTLDs.

4 Comments Tagged: .sport, core, ICANN, new gTLDs, new TLDs, sportaccord

Key-Systems sued over brand protection trademark

Israeli domain name registrar Domain The Net Technologies has filed a preemptive lawsuit against German competitor Key-Systems over their respective brand management trademarks.
According to the complaint, Domain The Net filed for a US trademark on the term “BrandShield”, which it uses to market brand protection services at brandshield.com.
Key-Systems, which runs a similar service called BrandShelter, filed an opposition to Domain The Net’s trademark application last October, due to the alleged potential for confusion.
Anticipating a possible lawsuit, Domain The Net has therefore sued first, asking the District Court in Virginia to declare that BrandShield does not infringe the BrandShelter trademark.
The complaint lists several dozen live brand+word trademarks to demonstrate that no one company should have exclusive rights to the word “brand”.
You can view the complaint, which was filed yesterday, in PDF format here.
(Hat tip: @GeorgeKirikos)

1 Comment Tagged: brandshelter, brandshield, cybersquatting, domain the net, key-systems, trademarks

Melbourne IT involved in 100+ gTLD applications

Melbourne IT says it has prepared applications for over 100 new generic top-level domains on behalf of clients including members of the Association of National Advertisers.
The registrar’s CEO, Theo Hnarakis, said in a press release:

Big brands from around the world have already engaged with Melbourne IT Digital Brand Services to help them apply for more than 100 new TLDs.
Big name companies in the financial sector, plus the retail and consumer goods industries have shown the most interest in applying so far, and roughly a quarter of the companies we are assisting are members of the Fortune Global 500. Applicants working with Melbourne IT also include members of the U.S. Association of National Advertisers.”

The company agrees with the emerging industry consensus which estimates 1,000 to 1,500 applications between Thursday and April 12, with roughly two-thirds of those “dot-brand” applications.
It’s an open industry secret that many companies ostensibly opposing the new gTLD program with the ANA are also preparing applications, but their level of enthusiasm is still open to question.
Anecdotally, many potential dot-brand applicants appear to be under the misapprehension that a new gTLD application is necessary to defend their brands from top-level cybersquatters, which is not the case.

1 Comment Tagged: .brand, dot-brand, ICANN, melbourne it, new gTLDs, new TLDs

Go Daddy gripe site relaunches with .co domain

Erstwhile Go Daddy gripe site No Daddy, formerly found at nodaddy.com, has been relaunched under new ownership at nodaddy.co.
The original site opened in 2007 as a place for customers to share “horror stories”, but was acquired by Go Daddy last July at around the same time it secured a reported $2.2 billion investment.
It’s still not entirely clear whether Go Daddy paid off the previous owners, or whether it was legal or other threats that caused the nodaddy.com domain to change hands.
The site once ranked second only to Go Daddy itself in Google search results for the company’s name.
The new site, NoDaddy.co, is unaffiliated with the previous owners.
The owner identifies himself as “AdverseVariable” and the domain is registered using a Whois privacy service offered by Bahamas-based registrar Internet.bs.
The new forum currently only has one post.

Comment Tagged: go daddy, nodaddy.co, nodaddy.com

ANA’s modest proposal: let us take over the new gTLD program or we’ll sue

The Association of National Advertisers has offered ICANN a risible last-minute “solution” to the outrage it has created over the new generic top-level domains program.
The ANA wants ICANN to create a temporary “Do Not Sell” list to protect trademark owners and intergovernmental organizations during the first application round, which begins Thursday.
While the first round is open, the ANA itself wants to takes over policy development for the program.
This is its “Proposed Way Forward” in full:

1. ICANN will proceed with its plan to begin accepting applications for new TLDs on January 12, as scheduled;
2. Concurrently, all NGOs, IGOs and commercial stakeholders concerned about protecting their brands will be given the opportunity to have those brands registered, without cost, on a temporary “Do Not Sell” list to be maintained by ICANN during the first application round (any interested party which does not want to have its brands on the Do Not Sell list and would rather apply for a TLD would be free to do so).
We will assemble a team from the interested constituencies to work with ICANN leadership during the first application round. If this group achieves consensus with respect to any proposals, those proposals will be voted on by the Board.
At the end of the first application round, should the parties continue to disagree, all parties will be free to pursue their legal and equitable rights without prejudice.

The alternative to adopting this proposal, ANA president Bob Liodice said in a letter to ICANN today, is “destructive and costly litigation”.
ICANN’s response should be provided “IMMEDIATELY”, Liodice wrote.
I can’t see him getting the answer he wants.
First, the ANA still seems to be worried about top-level cybersquatting, which any sane person can see is extremely unlikely to happen under the new gTLD program’s existing policies.
Second, it’s asking for ICANN to give anyone with a trademark the right to block a string matching that trademark at the top-level.
This may appear reasonable if you think a trademark is something like “Coca-Cola” or “Gucci” or “Google”.
But as soon as you realize that pretty much every word – “music”, “blog”, “web”, “London”, “Paris” – is trademarked, the idea of a Do Not Sell list becomes clearly ludicrous.
It would be a recipe for banning all gTLDs from the first application round.
Third, ICANN already has a mechanism for letting interested stakeholders achieve consensus on new trademark protection policies.
It’s called ICANN, and you don’t need to threaten litigation to participate. You just show up.
You can read the entire laughable ANA proposal here.

7 Comments Tagged: ana, association of national advertisers, cybersquatting, ICANN, new gTLDs