[bc-gnso] pressing the BC recommendations for dot-brand TLDs
sdelbianco at netchoice.org
Thu Jan 27 20:11:29 UTC 2011
To: BC Members
Re: ICANN Con call today regarding Registry Contracts
I joined a large con call today hosted by ICANN, to discuss new gTLD registy agreement. (see description at bottom of this note)
Berry Cobb and Jon Nevett were also on the call.
When we got to the Registry Code of Conduct, ICANN staff mentioned they had received many comments on how this would or would not work for dot-brand registries.
At that point I brought up the BC concerns expressed in our Guidebook comments filed 6-Dec in Cartagena.
I used the example of Canon, since they have said they may pursue a dot-brand.
I said Canon might want to operate its own Registrar and restrict registrations to its own operating divisions, like copiers.canon and cameras.canon
And Canon might want to manage a big sub-domain of photographers using Canon cameras, like [name].photos.canon
I said The Code of Conduct should not restrict dot-brands from using an owned or closely affiliated registrar to register and manage names that it controls. (e.g., for divisions, product lines, locations, customers, affiliates, etc. )
I gave the BC recommendation to insert this clause into the Registry Code of Conduct:
4. Nothing set forth in articles 1, 2, or 3 shall apply to a single-registrant ('dot brand') Registry Operator acting with respect to user data that is under its ownership and control, or with respect to conduct reasonably necessary for the management, operations and purpose of the TLD.
An experienced registry operator on the call said our 'carve out' would allow 'gaming' and abuse. (they say that a lot).
ICANN Staff is very resistant to any 'carve-out' for dot-brands. They oppose any exception (or even a definition) for dot-brand.
Craig Schwartz said ICANN didn't want to get in the business of monitoring Canon's copier business. ( I think that was the point of our recommendation — we don't want ICANN getting involved in how a dot-brand allocates registrations to entities it owns or controls)
Will discuss more on our Monday call, I hope.
http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org
Temporary Drafting Group Work Session on New gTLD Base Registry Agreement Issues – To Be Held 27 January 2011<http://blog.icann.org/2011/01/temporary-drafting-group-work-session-on-new-gtld-base-registry-agreement-issues-%e2%80%93-to-be-held-27-january-2011/>
by Craig Schwartz on January 14, 2011
The Temporary Drafting Group will hold a teleconference on 27 January 2011. The issues open for drafting/discussion during the call will include:
* Suggestions for additional language for Specification 9 (the Registry Code of Conduct)
* Proposed modifications to conditions related to the termination of a registry services agreement
* Suggestions for clarifications to provision requiring advance notice of registry price increases
* Concepts for continued registry operations instrument to provide continuity of services
This is not a formal public consultation, but is intended to inform drafting which might make up a later public consultation. Any results from the Temporary Drafting Group will be included in documents that will be posted for public comment. No results from the Group will necessarily be used in any agreement drafts, but inputs from the Group will be considered by the ICANN Staff in making recommendations relating to questions discussed or posed to the Group.
This third Temporary Drafting Group session will be held via teleconference on 27 January 2011 at 18.00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/s/1xxz), and is scheduled to last for 120 minutes.
The Temporary Drafting Group was formed in early 2010 and announced in a 28 April 2010 blog<http://blog.icann.org/2010/04/temporary-drafting-group-work-session-on-new-gtld-implementation-issues-%E2%80%93-to-be-held-3-may-2010/> post. If you would like to participate, please submit your name to TDG-Legal at ICANN.org<mailto:TDG-Legal at ICANN.org>, and we will provide you with information for the call.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Bc-gnso