Paul Garrin on Fri, 14 Jan 2000 07:20:56 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> New gTLDs: Summary of Public Comments, ICANN:WG-C |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The following is a summary of the public comments submitted on the position papers drafted by members of Working Group C (WG-C) of the ICANN Domain Name Supporting Organization (DNSO), as prepared by Jonathan Weinberg, chair of WG-C. Working Group C is tasked with formulating policies for the addition of Generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs) to the root of the Internet's Domain Name System (DNS). For more information, see: http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19991023.NCwgc-report.html and http://www.dnso.org/dnso/announce/Archives/msg00054.html - --Paul Garrin - ------- Forwarded Message Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 10:57:35 -0500 To: [email protected] From: Jonathan Weinberg <[email protected]> Subject: [wg-c] comment summary Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by dnso.dnso.org id RAA17121 Sender: [email protected] Precedence: bulk Attached, my informal summary of the comments on the wg-c interim report. I've divided the comments, very roughly, into four classes. The comments in Class I focus on the creation of new gTLDs; Class II on the stated need to delay rollout until after the implementation of better trademark protections; and Class III on Position Paper E. Class IV is miscellaneous. Coming soon: a straw poll and plans for moving forward. Jon - - ------------------------------------------- *Class I* Raul Echeberria (NC member, NCDNH), for Latin American noncommercial organizations - the creation of new gTLDs is important and positive, but must go forward under defined guidelines. If trademark holders register their domains under each new gTLD, then the creation of new gTLDs will merely destabilize the ccTLDs with no corresponding benefit. ICANN should approve a particular new gTLD only on a showing of a predefined level of public support, and only pursuant to a plan to avoid massive speculative purchases of domains in the new TLD. ICANN should create a limited number of new TLDs, and evaluate their operation and market acceptance, before creating or announcing more. Hiro Hotta (NC member, ISPCP) - New gTLDs are necessary, and the passage of the UDRP removed a big obstacle. New gTLDs should not be held back pending work on famous-mark protection. It's appropriate for ICANN should start with 6-10 followed by an evaluation period; but in order to avoid land-rush and artificial values for the initial set, it should also announce at the start its concrete plans (and schedule) for adding a much larger number. Registries must be shared; selection of new TLDs and registries should be market-driven. General-purpose gTLDs are appropriate. Limited-purpose gTLDs may be appropriate, but present problems because they present the need for ICANN to monitor that the registry is observing the charter and not corrupting the gTLD into a de facto proprietary TLD. Kathryn Kleiman (NC member, NCDNH) et al. - ICANN should add new gTLDs as quickly as possible; it should roll out several hundred TLDs over the next few years, and thereafter adopt a per-month cap. A significant percentage should be used for names that reflect the distinct cultyral/linguistic groups of the world community, in part by geographic region, and including .naa. The answer to trademark policing concerns lies in making available easily searchable lists of SLDs in the gTLDs. There should be both general-purpose and limited purpose TLDs, and registries may be non-profit or for-profit. Registry data must be escrowed. Michael Schneider (NC member, ISPCP) - New gTLDs are necessary. Ideally, an unlimited or large (similar to 500) number should be created, so that it would not make sense for a given company to try to register its name in all gTLDs. That would best enhance overall competition in electronic commerce. I do not agree with PPC's statement that "appropriate safeguards" must be in place before the addition of new gTLDs. AXISNET (Peruvian Ass'n of Users and ISPs) - ICANN should declare its intention to add 500 new gTLDs over the next three years. Of those, a defined portion should be reserved for names reflecting distinct cultural/linguistic groups, perhaps on the basis of ICANN's 5 geographic regions. With respect to Latin America, ICANN should begin with the NOS (Naciones Originales Sudamericanas) and/or LAT (LatinAmerican) gTLDs; it should add 25 gTLDs each year corresponding to the various (more than 50) languages spoken in the Latin American area. ICANN should not delay further to accommodate trademark interests; we already have a UDRP. CPSR (by Andy Oram) - PPB "offers the best route to achieving competition in the registration of domain names, and furthermore that it is the paper demonstrating most strongly the spirit of experimentation and open standards that has characterized the Internet since its beginning." "We believe the opening of the TLD space can be started right away, without waiting for other technical or policy changes to fall into place." InterWorking Labs - supports PPB. Concerned about the so-called "safeguards" proposed by some to constrain the deployment of new gTLDs. The new gTLDs should be deployed rapidly and the word "safeguards" should not be code for obstruction and delay. InterAccess Company - supports PPB. ICANN should immediately commit to a vigorous increase in the number of gTLDs, enabling more people, organizations and businesses to register the name that they feel best describes them. Unnecessary bureaucracy and delay will help only those few large businesses seeking to stifle competition. Melbourne IT - supports PPA. This approach provides for the expansion of the gTLD space in a stable, predictable and professional manner; is responsive to the requirements of both commercial and non-commercial users; and provides an opportunity for IP, consumer protection and other issues associated with gTLD expansion to emerge progressively and be addressed in a systematic manner. Office of Advocacy, US SBA - There should be a limited introduction of new TLDs, followed by a testbed evaluation, and then a steady introduction of more gTLDs. A large number of TLDs will create more opportunities for new entrants; the total should be bounded only by technical limitations. ICANN should begin with a limited introduction of new TLDs followed by an evaluation period, but the technical criteria for the evaluation should be defined beforehand, and ICANN should declare in advance that it will add additional TLDs if the technical criteria are met. Centralized whois info should be available, but users should have the option of making their contact information available only upon a showing of good cause. It is appropriate to delay introduction of new gTLDs until after resolution of the famous-mark protection issue, if this can be done in a timely manner. Such safeguards should not expand trademark rights. PSI-Japan - supports PPA Register.com - We support Position Paper A and the controlled introduction of new TLDs, both general and special purpose, into the market. New TLDs will reduce the focus on .com, and give customers more service offerings. It is critical that all registrars should have equal access to the registries for the new TLDs. Competition ultimately benefits the end user by giving them more choices, better prices and better service. TUCOWS.com - supports PPB. "As long as the new gTLD registries meet a set of minimum acceptable technical standards, regardless of how liberal or strict they may be, that the registry be allow to determine their own business model and operational standards." Bret Fausett - supports PPB. Harold Feld - supports PPB. "It is crucial that new TLDs be added as swiftly as possible. Furthermore, there must be no perception of artificial scarcity. The limit on new TLDs should be set simply as a matter of technical feasibility. Other concerns that favor special interests, such as protection of trademark, have no place in these decisions." Prof. Michael Froomkin - ICANN should announce that N new domains (N need not be large) will be added each month. Starting just with a small number, without an "upgrade path" to a larger number, will put unnecessary pressure on the new domains and lead to many problems. PPC seems like a recipe for needless endless delay; there should be mechanisms within whois to protect privacy via the equivalent of an unlisted number. A gtld should be made available, limited to noncommercial users, in which contact information is shielded by the registry. Rob Hassett - ICANN should begin with 10 new TLDs, coupled with a fixed schedule permitting the addition of an unlimited number. This will most effectively promote competition in the long run. Famous-mark protection is desirable, and should be accelerated so as to avoid hindering the addition of new TLDs. For-profit and not-for-profit registries should be allowed; TLDs presumptively should be shared. Irish <[email protected]> - supports PPB as providing the greatest flexibility for consumer choice and technological advancement Hal Lubsen (Domain Bank, Inc) - supports PPA. Hans Klein, Chairman, CPSR - supports PPB. The artificial shortage of domain names has resulted in inflated prices being paid for character strings. The losers in this situation are individuals, non-profits, people in developing countries, and small businesses. More gTLDs would reduce the barriers facing smaller players. Neal McBurnett - It is important to move ahead on opening up new gTLDs as quickly as possible. ICANN must make a *commitment* that there will be hundreds of new gTLDs as soon as is practible. The world must have confidence that it isn't going to stop with the first few new gTLDs or else the whole move to gTLDs will lose much of its purpose. Michael McNulty -- supports PPB, but willing to support "A" in the spirit of compromise. In the last six months, the lack of available names for registration has been stultifying. The resultant selection of names that are extremely capricious and fictitious have resulted in a stupid drag on commerce. Prof. Malla Pollack - Open as many gTLDs as possible as quickly as possible, and ban any one entity from registering the same domain name in more than one gTLD. ICANN should declare domain names irrelevant to "trademark claims," and insist that registries refuse to act on "trademark" and "dilution" claims absent court order. The only way to open the Internet for full communication or commercial use is to decouple domain names and trademarks. Prof. David Post: supports PPB. Jim Rowe - the only gTLD that is open to commerce right now is .com. Due to the overcrowding on that, we are having to use multiple hyphens in our names. This is a big pain for our potential customers. Any new commercial gTLDs would be greatly appreciated. Don Stauffer - Slow rollout of new TLDs could cause people to register addresses in domains that are suboptimal for them (and better-suited to others), simply b/c these are the ones that were rolled out first. Accordingly, after rolling out one or two low-volume special purpose gTLDs to test registry and procedures robustness, ICANN should release a reasonably large number (25 or so) of TLDs at once. These should include multiple TLDs for personal or family use and also for business use. Bob Stoddard - Of the position papers, B is the best b/c it urges a "flexible, diverse, and open approach," believes that "the TLD policy ought to reflect end user preferences," recognizes that creating only 6-10 new gTLDs "risks creating an oligopoly," and urges that ICANN's role should be limited to technical and administrative coordination of registry operators. Ewan Sutherland, International Telecommunications Users Group - ICANN should take rapid steps towards the introduction of a fairly large name space, with the possibility that some will succeed and others fail. The gTLD name space should be open for an organisation to propose being the sole registrar for a TLD. *Class II* Jonathan Cohen (now an ICANN Board member) - supports PPC Dr. Victoria Carrington (NC member, IPC) - supports PPC AOL - supports PPC. AOL opposes compounding the existing problems by adding new gTLDs until workable solutions to cybersquatting have been found and tested. In addition, prior to the introduction of any new gTLDs, a mechanism needs to be established to allow fair access to the new names and to avoid a free-for-all as numerous people simultaneously seek to be the first to register generic names (e.g., "computer") as well as well known names. ASCAP - generally supports PPC. Imperative that ICANN ensure that registrars maintain freely accessible accurate whois data, including contact information, so that ASCAP can locate Internet actors infringing its members' copyrights. Bell Atlantic - Supports PPC. It is questionable whether introduction of new gTLDs would further Internet growth and benefit Internet users. After implementation of UDRP and famous marks procedures, there must be a study and evaluation period to ensure that those procedures are working as intended. This study should include the introduction of a single new gTLD, as a testbed. In the interim, steps that can be taken to mitigate any problems with crowded domain name space include: "Consider adding further domain names to the left of the dot (e.g., acme.cars.com, acme.tools.com)." British Telecom (by John C. Lewis) - No new gTLDs before assessment of the adequacy of the UDRP, improved registration procedures, famous-mark protection, "guidance" from ICANN on cross-jurisdictional issues involving ICANN and national anti-cybersquatting remedies. After that is done, a few narrowly-defined gTLDs could be introduced on a trial basis. ICANN should map out a framework of defined purpose TLDs so that users can rely on the structure of the DNS to find particular businesses; it should not add TLDs on an unstructured basis. Disney - supports PPC. Currently, the UDRP is untested & unworkably narrow; similarly, the operation of whois in the competitive registrar context is undefined and untested. There should be no gTLD expansion until these problems are solved. International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition - First need improved registration procedures, implementation of a quick and effective UDRP, and famous-marks protection Mike Heltzer, for INTA - supports PPC. "There has been no consensus -- rough or otherwise -- with respect to new gTLDs." Nintendo of America - supports PPC. The necessary safeguards for the addition of new gTLDs are not in place, given the countless abusive gTLD registrations under .com, .net and .org for which there is no sufficient remedy under the current system. Software & Information Industry Ass'n (by Mike Flynn) - unwise to add new gTLDs until ICANN has ensured the creation of a robust, responsive whois system, and addressed the problems of site identification, in the existing gTLDs. Once that is done, we would support adding new gTLDs. Time Warner - supports PPC. Once famous-mark protection is in place, a few new gTLDs should be introduced slowly to study the effect on DNS stability and trademark protection; only afterwards should more gTLDs be added. While the rapid addition of many new gTLDs may reduce the speculators' market for common word domain names in the short run, the resulting consumer confusion and irreversible effect on Internet commerce could be severe. John C. Lewis, for some members of the Business and Commercial constituency: The case for introducing new gTLDs has not been convincingly made. Before introducing any new gTLDs, problems relating to UDRP implementation and "jurisdictional domains" must be resolved; also, there should be a thorough examination of the implications. After this is done, a very small number of narrowly-defined gTLDs could be introduced on a trial basis. [Note: I have received messages from other members of the B&C constituency, including MCI Worldcom, disavowing this statement - jtw] Angela Babineck (Associate, Intellectual Property & Public Policy, Interactive Digital Software Association) - supports PPC Marilyn Cade -- There remain serious potential problems that must be resolved, and criteria that must be in place, before any new gTLDs are introduced. There has been no rigorous examination of whether gTLD expansion will in fact be beneficial. Confidence in the newly established UDRP process must be built, and there must be famous-marks protection: otherwise, companies with famous marks will have no choice but to register those marks in each of the new gTLDs. There must be dialogue with the ccTLDs. Once criteria are developed and implemented, then a very small number (preferably one) could be introduced. J. Scott Evans (trademark and copyright attorney, and chair of INTA's DNS Subcommittee) - supports PPC Elissa D. Hecker, NMPA - "it is necessary to first have improved and more specific domain name registration procedures, the implementation of quick and effective uniform dispute resolution procedures for abusive registrations, and the creation and implementation of a system to safeguard famous and well-known trademark across all gTLDs." Mike Kirk, AIPLA - "no new gTLDs should be introduced until 1) the new UDRP and its implementing rules . . . have proven themselves to be effective and 2) a workable system for protecting famous marks is in place and has also proven to be effective. There is simply no urgent need to add huge numbers of gTLDs at this time." Steve Metalitz -- new gTLDs should not be established absent "established and proven procedures . . . to improve the quality and accessibility of registrant contact data, as well as satisfactory dispute resolution procedures." Andrea Morisi, American Red Cross - support PPC; "I would recommend the adoption of a few (from 1 to 3) gTLDs for a test." *Class III* *Support PPE* Judge Steve Russell Ishgooda Tewehshon'on Laurie Anne Whitt Martha E. Ture Link Shadley Jody Peiffer Willett - Nokwisa Yona Paul Pureau R. Richard Valencia, for Oregon Chicano Coalition Elsie Herten (executive director, KOLA International Campaign) Ted Burton Harold P. Koehler Jon Schaefer Alan Mandell Brian Hirsch, Ph.D. Cherie Blackfeather Gloria Hale-Showalter Carla Lopez Michael Nelson ("Rainman") John Russell Pamela M. Creasy Stephen Laboueff Mishuana R. Goeman Achaessa James N. Gant Allan Finnegan Cara A. Cowan Marc Becker J. Criswell Shane Caraveo E. F. Aranyosi "Thunderhawk" <[email protected]> Sue Stowell Coll-Peter Thrush Lynn John and Walter John Lance Foster Maya Baxter Peter Henry [email protected] "Condori" <[email protected]> Ben <[email protected]> Phyllis Noah Sonja Keohane B. Black (Waya-nvwati) Prof. Peter d'Errico Ron Andrade, for the Los Angeles City/County Native American Indian Commission [email protected] Laura Spencer Jean Frederick Jim RabidWolf Hickinbotham Qwo-Li Driskill Leland Smith Janice Strong Angela Barth LyNett Freeman Les St. Pierre Toni Cecil Ted Wilburn Russell Imrie [email protected] Frank Brent Billy Silverhawk Colleen Donovan "Marion & Don" <[email protected]> Mary Westwindwalker Ruth Gilbert Kate Lago [email protected] [email protected] Iris Krenson Douglas Gravestock (Suye'ta) George Durbin David Crockett Williams Linda Vogelsang Judge Ron Johnny Prof. David M. Mednicoff [email protected] Michael D. Caesar Chris Cota Phil Young Hugh Jarvis Wayne Neighbors, Ph.D. Barbara Meyer Robert J. Conley John Hart [email protected] Allan Spiegel Amy J. Ruggles Tracy Stanhoff Gary Mazurek Mark J Wheeler Lisa A. Nelmida Dan Urioste Danny Harjo Preston Thomas Francis Steindorf Marley Shebala Terrie S. Restivo & Kay Cope, Turtle Island Dignity & Education Joan J.R. Brown Keisha Josephs "Jade" <[email protected]> Jaelithe Rodebaugh Wendy Ancell James A. Casey [email protected] Arigon Starr Karen Muir Lara Herscovitch Rebecca Cabell Larry Kibby [email protected] John Berry Amy S. Davis Wesley Westphal Paula Marceau Gail Bundy [email protected] Lorraine Brooks Steve Dupuis [email protected] [email protected] Preston Hardison, for the Indigenous Biodiversity Information Network William McLaughlin Ana Morales Ritch Azocar Renato Corsetti Ron Maurice (didn't actually file a comment; he sent a supportive message to Eric Brunner, which Eric posted to comments-gtlds) Kalera Ashley Astrida R. Blukis Onat Pablo Lonesome Wolf Sven-Erik Soosaar David C. Ergo Shelly Covert Bobbie L. Robinson [email protected] Diane Spears Lowry Dave Hartley Manny Questions <[email protected]> Mrs. Ami Offenbacher Roger Ferguson Jodi Slayton Elsbeth Vocat Julie Douglas Trudi ( [email protected]) [email protected] Mr Dawson Her Many Horses Brian Braginton-Smith Neal Salisbury Sandra I. Ehrhorn Bill Ahrens Valerie Scott Waweeyis Hunter Louis Axeman, Jr. [email protected] Bill Wiyaka `Oeta Pax Riddle Janice Strong Anna Hunter Peter Young Paul Shunatona Troy Hunter Eberhard Wenzel Angeline Greensill & Tainui Hapu Jeanette Bushnell Patricia Christine Aqiimuk Paul Laura Manthe Brenda Ireland Susan Campbell Martha Bartter Barbara-Helen Hill Cheryl L. Spaniola Manuela Ribeiro Sanches Mary Kapelus Lisa A. Nelmida Michael Mclaughlin MB Williams Ellen Holmes James Cooper gFaye Fleming Jimmy Boy Dial *other comments regarding PPE* Carla Walker - It will be difficult to determine who is a legitimate .naa registrant, and to decide who should participate in making that determination. Chris Cota - Does the Intertribal Council On Utility Policy actually represent all of the Tribes? And what process was used to select particular entities to do the administration? Thomas Trischler - Tribal governments and Indian nations should be able to use the .gov TLD. *Class IV -- Miscellaneous* Dave Lalande - supports Simplified Domains, a proprietary root system that would include all possible three-letter combinations as TLDs Jason Dwyer -- supports Simplified Domains. Registries cannot effectively screen applications for SLDs in special-purpose TLDs. No gTLD taxonomy can work, b/c the gTLDs will either be too broad to be useful, or be too numerous to remember Robert Stoddard -- supports Simplified Domains. Robert Thorstensen -- supports Simplified Domains. [email protected] - supports Simplified Domains. Adding new "extensions" will simply lead registrants to register the same names in multiple TLDs, without public benefit Adria L. Chappell - .porn should be made available to facilitate filtering and categorization Craig Cockburn - Scotland should have its own TLD Kendall Dawson, Bob Stoddard - IOD's .web should be added to the legacy root Steve Finn - Any domain name holder that intends to hold its SLD for the long term should have the right to that character string across every TLD. David Golamb - presents a plan for converting the DNS into a "name / category / class / location identification system" Paul Gregson - TLDs should be optional Dr. Ian Jay Kaufman - ICANN should implement the Nice classification taxonomy (so that, for example, the gTLD .39 would refer to packaging for sale of food products). Ram Narula - I would like to propose the idea of new gTLDs being com.1, com.2, com.3....com.99999, net.1, net.2 to net.999999 and org.1, org.2, to org.99999. Say company.com is taken, and Mr. X wants to register company.com, Mr. X would get company.com.2, then if Mr. Y wants to register company.com after company.com.2 is taken, he would get company.com.3. Robert Simpson (World Wide Web Shop) - ICANN should not approve both .shop and .store except under a system in which a registrant in one automatically has the option of registering the same SLD (or preventing others' registrations of that SLD) in the other Miesha Vukasinovic - introducing lots of new gTLDs will confuse users and will add to the problem of domains registered in the wrong TLDs, absent legislation to ensure that the new TLDs are used in the manner in which they were introduced originally. Possible new TLDs: .gov (available to all national governments), .sex, .alt (for noncommercial uses that do not belong in .com) - ------- End of Forwarded Message - --------------------------------------------------------- Get Free Private Encrypted Email https://mail.lokmail.net -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 (C) 1997-1999 Network Associates, Inc. and its affiliated companies. (Diffie-Helman/DSS-only version) iQA/AwUBOH6ElTfGi5V2oI3/EQJeSACg137cgaeTW72rzIukx4Jo1dmjNV4AoPzS QQfj6xnFJCN0wJen6j0CoGtR =Tebl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]