[Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Definitions of Reserved Names, Premium Names and Premium Pricing
Kathy Kleiman
kathy at kathykleiman.com
Wed Jun 14 12:47:24 UTC 2017
Right and tx! Hence two lists -- a list of unlimited reserved names,
and a list of the 100 contractually-allowed Reserved Names. My thought
was to give them different names because, as you point out, they serve
different functions. But both are called "Reserved Names"...
Best,
Kathy
On 6/13/2017 3:53 PM, Winterfeldt, Brian J. wrote:
>
> For clarity, and to quickly distill the interpretation confirmed by
> others who work with registries:
>
> 1.Registries may /_reserve_/ as many (unlimited) domains as they want,
> contractual limitations only apply to the registration or activation
> of domains in the DNS. /See/ RA § 2.6 (Jan 9. 2014).
>
> 2.Registries may /_activate_/ in the DNS up to one hundred operational
> or promotional domains and act as the registered name holder through
> self-allocation or an ICANN-accredited registrar. /See/ RA Spec. 5, §
> 3.2 (Jan. 9. 2014).
>
> Anecdotal evidence suggests that the former has been used in an
> attempt to circumvent RPMs. Whereas, the latter has been used for
> various anchor tenant and Qualified Launch Programs.
>
> It is worth noting that the three categories identified, and proposed
> definitions, can have a fair amount of overlap and are not mutually
> exclusive.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Brian
>
> *Brian J. Winterfeldt*
>
> Co-Head of Global Brand Management and Internet Practice
>
> Mayer Brown LLP
>
> *From:*gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kathy Kleiman
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 13, 2017 2:54 PM
> *To:* Dorrain, Kristine; Lori Schulman; gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Definitions of Reserved Names,
> Premium Names and Premium Pricing
>
> Hi Kristine, Useful discussion! At least as I read Registry Agreement
> 2.6, it's a reference to Specification 5 - thus, the same 100 Reserved
> Names (which the New gTLD Registry Operator does not have to share).
> But as I read and have always read the language, anything beyond that
> 100 Reserved Names may be registered by the Registry Operator but
> cannot be merely "reserved," but must be "registered" through a
> Registrar under the Registry name (or some other corporate name).
> Thus, these domains would not be "Reserved Name" (e.g., a special
> list of unregistered domains), but will be visible, registered domain
> names appearing in the Whois.
>
> The problem I thought we were facing is some New gTLD Registries
> creating large Reserved Lists (far beyond the 100 of Specification 5,
> and outside the requirements of 2.6.) If that's not an issue, then
> great. But the problems I was hearing with "Reserved Names" would seem
> to be beyond a few dozen here or there...
>
> But you are working through today's reality while I am living the
> original Registry Agreement drafting and understanding. What am I
> missing?
>
> Registry Agreement Section 2.6 below.
>
> Best and tx, Kathy
>
> 2.6
> Reserved Names. Except to the extent that
> ICANN otherwise expressly
> authorizes in writing, Registry Operator shall
> comply with the requirements set forth in
> Specification 5 attached hereto (“Specification 5”).
> Registry Operator may at any time
> establish or modify policies concerning Registry
> Operator’s ability to reserve (i.e., withhold
> from registration or allocate to Registry Operator,
> but not register to third parties, delegate,
> use, activate in the DNS or otherwise make
> available) or block additional character strings
> within the TLD at its discretion. Except as
> specified in Specification 5, if Registry Operator
> is the registrant for any domain names in the
> registry TLD, such registrations must be
> through an ICANN accredited registrar, and will
> be considered Transactions (as defined in
> Section 6.1) for purposes of calculating the
> Registry-‐ level transaction fee to be paid to
> ICANN by Registry Operator pursuant to Section 6.1
>
> On 6/13/2017 1:35 PM, Dorrain, Kristine wrote:
>
> This is why I included the citations to the RA.
>
> Section 2.6: Registries can reserve or block names.
>
> Spec 5: Registries MUST reserve certain names and can reserve up
> to 100 names for its own RO use without paying (or allocate them
> to customers in a QLP).
>
> Pricing and designation of some names as “premium” may sometimes
> go hand in hand with reserving them, but it’s separate, as the
> definitions below make clear.
>
> Kristine
>
> *From:*gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Lori
> Schulman
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 13, 2017 10:30 AM
> *To:* Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com>
> <mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com>; gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Definitions of Reserved Names,
> Premium Names and Premium Pricing
>
> The quotes can be removed. These are original definitions that I
> drafted based on my understanding of the terms. Sorry for the
> confusion. I had started using the quotes to set the language
> apart. It doesn’t really matter.
>
> Too my understanding all reserve names are reserved by contract no
> matter the reason. There are the 100 which can be for
> marketing/whatever, the name collision lists, the geo terms,
> etc. In my opinion the definition should try to cover it all.
> If there are noncontractual reserved names then we might segregate
> the definition.
>
> Staff, is there such a thing as uncontracted reserve names?
>
> Lori S. Schulman
>
> Senior Director, Internet Policy
>
> *International Trademark Association (INTA)*
>
> +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman
>
> *From:*gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kathy
> Kleiman
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 13, 2017 7:25 PM
> *To:* gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Definitions of Reserved Names,
> Premium Names and Premium Pricing
>
> I understand that there is a second set of reserved names which
> goes beyond the 100 domain names that New gTLD Registries are
> allowed under the Registry Agreement for operational and technical
> purposes (e.g., nic.newgld).
>
> Beyond these Reserved Names, there is a different list (much more
> massive in some cases) that some Registry Operators register for
> themselves and keep in abeyance - not for sale as Premium Names.
> It is a different list, and apparently causing the larger
> headache. Both are informally called "Reserved Names," but the
> latter may be the larger headache. Shall we mention both -- and
> give them different names, e.g., Reserved Names[contract] and
> Reserved Names[outside the contract]?
>
> Question: quotation marks are confusing below. Premium Names has a
> close quote at the end, but no open quote and no citation. Premium
> pricing has an open quote at the start, but no close quote, and
> also no citation. If we are citing documents, could we put the
> citation in and a link?
>
> Best, Kathy
>
> On 6/13/2017 12:08 PM, Lori Schulman wrote:
>
> And for clarity,
>
> Here we are now with the drafting:
>
> Reserved names: second level domain names that are withheld
> from registration per written agreement between the registry
> and ICANN(Section 2.6 and Specification 5 in the base Registry
> Agreement).
>
> Premium names: second level domain names that are offered for
> registration that, in the determination of the registry, are
> more desirable for the purchaser”
>
> Premium pricing, “second level domain names that are offered
> for registration, that in the determination of the registry
> are more desirable for the purchaser and will command a price
> that is higher than a nonpremium name. Premium prices may vary
> depending on what the registry perceives as having greater
> value to the domain purchaser. This may include: length of
> string; whether the string is an acronym, or whether the
> string has other meaning in the market”
>
> Please add any further comments on this version and keep the
> string going.
>
> Lori
>
> Lori S. Schulman
>
> Senior Director, Internet Policy
>
> *International Trademark Association (INTA)*
>
> +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman
>
> *From:*gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Lori Schulman
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 13, 2017 6:05 PM
> *To:* Dorrain, Kristine <dorraink at amazon.com>
> <mailto:dorraink at amazon.com>; Amr Elsadr
> <amr.elsadr at icann.org> <mailto:amr.elsadr at icann.org>;
> gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Definitions of Reserved
> Names, Premium Names and Premium Pricing
>
> I support removing the sentences and then keep them in reserve
> if the issue about needing more clarification is raised either
> on our subteam call or the full review group.
>
> Lori
>
> Lori S. Schulman
>
> Senior Director, Internet Policy
>
> *International Trademark Association (INTA)*
>
> +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman
>
> *From:*Dorrain, Kristine [mailto:dorraink at amazon.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 13, 2017 5:58 PM
> *To:* Lori Schulman <lschulman at inta.org
> <mailto:lschulman at inta.org>>; Amr Elsadr <amr.elsadr at icann.org
> <mailto:amr.elsadr at icann.org>>; gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org>
> *Subject:* RE: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Definitions of Reserved
> Names, Premium Names and Premium Pricing
>
> Thanks Lori,
>
> I think the first sentence is clear and concise and I like
> it. I prefer just removing last two sentences also, unless
> other members feel the explanation adds something.
>
> But I do not object to your revision in #2 either, if the
> group feels it’s necessary.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Kristine
>
> *From:*Lori Schulman [mailto:lschulman at inta.org]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 13, 2017 8:50 AM
> *To:* Dorrain, Kristine <dorraink at amazon.com
> <mailto:dorraink at amazon.com>>; Amr Elsadr
> <amr.elsadr at icann.org <mailto:amr.elsadr at icann.org>>;
> gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org>
> *Subject:* RE: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Definitions of Reserved
> Names, Premium Names and Premium Pricing
>
> Hi, Kristine,
>
> Thank you for your points. I agree with the references in
> red. As far as the purple goes, I had debated on including it
> but wondered if examples would be helpful. Once I thought
> about examples, I felt that in fairness to the process, I
> should mention dictionary terms and trademarks. I agree that
> the language could carry emotional weight for some but I also
> think that it reflects market realities and it is a statement
> of fact. I don’t agree with other term of value to RO as the
> value is to the purchaser or what the RO thinks the purchaser
> might pay. Perhaps a compromise is “This may include: length
> of string; whether the string is an acronym, or whether the
> string has other meaning in the market.”
>
> I don’t necessarily object to removing the last 2 sentences
> entirely but I thought some explanation could be useful to the
> process. My proposal would be to:
>
> 1)Remove last 2 sentences entirely
>
> 2)or revise as “This may include: length of string; whether
> the string is an acronym, or whether the string has other
> meaning in the market.”
>
> Would that work for you?
>
> Any thoughts or suggestions from others?
>
> Lori S. Schulman
>
> Senior Director, Internet Policy
>
> *International Trademark Association (INTA)*
>
> +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman
>
> *From:*Dorrain, Kristine [mailto:dorraink at amazon.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 13, 2017 5:21 PM
> *To:* Lori Schulman <lschulman at inta.org
> <mailto:lschulman at inta.org>>; Amr Elsadr <amr.elsadr at icann.org
> <mailto:amr.elsadr at icann.org>>; gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org>
> *Subject:* RE: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Definitions of Reserved
> Names, Premium Names and Premium Pricing
>
> Thanks Lori. Here are my thoughts:
>
> Just for clarity, I suggest adding the reference in red for
> people who aren’t familiar with the registry agreement.
>
> As far as premium pricing, I think the second two sentences of
> explanation aren’t needed and changed the text to purple for
> the group to consider my opinion. At a minimum, I think the
> yellow highlighted bit is kind of emotionally charged to imply
> that registry operators put a premium price on established
> trademarks. Certainly we want to investigate those claims,
> but I think listing it as an example can create bias. If the
> group votes to leave the purple text, I propose we change the
> highlighted text to…”or dictionary term or other term of value
> to the RO.”
>
> Thanks for kicking this off, Lori!
>
> Kristine
>
> *From:*gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Lori Schulman
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 13, 2017 3:02 AM
> *To:* Amr Elsadr <amr.elsadr at icann.org
> <mailto:amr.elsadr at icann.org>>; gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org>
> *Subject:* [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Definitions of Reserved Names,
> Premium Names and Premium Pricing
>
> I am taking stab at definitions so we can have a jumping off
> point. I would like to have these nailed down by the time of
> our call on Friday.
>
> Reserved names: second level domain names that are withheld
> from registration per written agreement between the registry
> and ICANN(Section 2.6 and Specification 5 in the base Registry
> Agreement).
>
> Premium names: second level domain names that are offered for
> registration that, in the determination of the registry, are
> more desirable for the purchaser”
>
> Premium pricing, “second level domain names that are offered
> for registration, that in the determination of the registry
> are more desirable for the purchaser and will command a price
> that is higher than a nonpremium name. Premium prices may vary
> depending on what the registry perceives as having greater
> value to the domain purchaser. This may include: length of
> string; whether the string is an acronym, dictionary term or
> trademark with established good will.”
>
> Lori
>
> Please send you
>
> Lori S. Schulman
>
> Senior Director, Internet Policy
>
> *International Trademark Association (INTA)*
>
> +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman
>
> *From:*gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Amr
> Elsadr
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 13, 2017 1:10 AM
> *To:* gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org>
> *Subject:* [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] Action Items from the Sunrise
> Registrations Sub Team Call - 9 June 2017
>
> Dear Sunrise Registrations Sub Team Members,
>
> Below are the action items from the Sub Team Call on 9 June.
> The action items, notes, meeting document and materials as
> well as recordings and transcripts have been posted to the
> meeting’s wiki page here: https://community.icann.org/x/HjzwAw
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.icann.org%2Fx%2FHjzwAw&data=01%7C01%7CBWinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Ce87f27a1d2874b67da9508d4b28d98bb%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=AsrKX2qm0tHSO5QS6Qaa20eBkDjMWf8FutWY49mVJ3Y%3D&reserved=0>.
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
> Action Items:
>
> 1.*Staff*to reword question 16 to: “Explore use and the types
> of proof required by the TMCH when purchasing domains in the
> sunrise period.”
>
> 2.*Staff*to replace “RPMs” with “Sunrise” in questions 17
> through 21
>
> 3.*Staff*to rephrase Q22 as: “Are there certain registries
> that should not have a mandatory sunrise based on their
> published registration/eligibility policies?” and add examples
> mentioned by Kathy Kleiman and Kristine Dorrain
>
> 4.*Staff*to assist the Sub Team/Working Group on necessary
> adjustments to the workplan, taking into consideration the
> time required for the Sub Team to complete its work, and the
> Working Group’s time requirement in conducting the review of
> Sunrise Registrations
>
> 5.*Maxim Alzoba*to supply suggestion for data on question 16
> (or another question as appropriate)
>
> 6.Outstanding action item for the *Sub Team* to define
> “reserved names”, “premium names” and “premium pricing”
>
> 7.*Sub Team*to suggest data requirements to answer questions
> 17 and 22 before next week’s call
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Gnso-rpm-sunrise mailing list
>
> Gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-rpm-sunrise at icann.org>
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-sunrise
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-rpm-sunrise&data=01%7C01%7CBWinterfeldt%40mayerbrown.com%7Ce87f27a1d2874b67da9508d4b28d98bb%7C09131022b7854e6d8d42916975e51262%7C0&sdata=ypgsmIN25hw4DUs9o3VxKlLZmiZaLcIW7SJoryCBH7g%3D&reserved=0>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for
> the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you
> have received this email in error please notify the system manager. If
> you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute
> or copy this e-mail.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-sunrise/attachments/20170614/9e353005/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gnso-rpm-sunrise
mailing list