[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposal for introducing new public interest generic gTLDs

[Jean Guillon]

Can I publish this proposal to the new gTLD group on LinkedIn ?
I think it makes sense for all those who don't know how things happen at
ICANN.

Feed back appreciated.

On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 4:55 PM Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:

> Jeff,
>
> This is meant to be a proposal for a closed TLD, and not an open
> restricted TLD.  There would be no third party registrants.  It's possible
> that in the press of time, and drafting by committee, we were not
> sufficiently clear.  Can you point to some specific places where this jumps
> out at you?  I did a final scrub last night and made some changes meant to
> clarify this, but I clearly did not catch them all.
>
> We can revise and either recirculate or hold this draft for further
> comments.  Either way, we want this point to be completely clear and
> unambiguous.
>
> Best regards.
>
> Greg
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 9:38 AM Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for this proposal George and the team.  The major item that jumps
>> out at me is that the TLD structure you describe is not really a “closed”
>> TLD, but rather is akin an “open restricted” TLD.
>>
>>
>>
>> Anyone can already apply for an “open restricted” TLD without any of the
>> restrictions you have set forth in this paper. This is like .bank,
>> .pharmacy or others that have third party registrants who agree to very
>> strict validation requirements.  So, if I can apply for a .earthquake (your
>> example) as an “open restricted” TLD without any of the restrictions that
>> are contained within your paper, why would I apply for your “PICgTLD” and
>> agree up front to (a) no expectancy of renewal; (b) restrictions on
>> transfers; (c) obligations of a Council, (d) approval by the board, etc.?
>> What is the benefit for me to do that when  I can achieve the same thing
>> without agreeing to any of that?
>>
>>
>>
>> Now if  we stated that all of the registrations are “owned” by the
>> Registry itself for use in connection with itself and its members, then
>> perhaps that gets closer to the closed TLD.  Thus, the registry could
>> “license” registrations to third parties (not transfer ownership) so long
>> as the registry itself always maintains ownership of the names and can
>> control the type of content on the sites.
>>
>> Thanks for kicking off the discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jeffrey J. Neuman
>>
>> Founder & CEO
>>
>> JJN Solutions, LLC
>>
>> p: +1.202.549.5079
>>
>> E: jeff at jjnsolutions.com
>>
>> http://jjnsolutions.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> *On Behalf
>> Of *George Sadowsky
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2020 7:03 AM
>> *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
>> *Subject:* [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposal for introducing new public
>> interest generic gTLDs
>>
>>
>>
>> All,
>>
>>
>>
>> As promised, attached is our proposed method of implementing the use of
>> new closed generic top level domains in the public interest within the DNS.
>> It has been formulated by Alan Greenberg, Kathy Kleiman, Greg Shatan and
>> me.  We believe that it has merit and deserves consideration by both the
>> working group and the broader ICANN community, and we welcome the
>> opportunity to present it for comment, discussion and criticism.  We
>> believe that while there are improvements can be made, the approach of
>> creating such a category of TLDs, trusted and protected to serve a public
>> interest, is a goal that can be achieved.
>>
>>
>>
>> We hope that the proposal and the approach that it takes to implementing
>> such a new class of gTLDs will receive serious consideration and criticism
>> by the community.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> George
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
>> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
>> _______________________________________________
>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
>> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
>> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
>> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You
>> can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
>> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
>> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20200721/3a90e52d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 113 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20200721/3a90e52d/image001-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 30066 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20200721/3a90e52d/image002-0001.png>