[gnso-rpm-wg] A Brave New World Without Sunrises or the TMCH
J. Scott Evans
jsevans at adobe.com
Fri Apr 14 21:56:59 UTC 2017
I think you could say that about 99% of the new gTLDs. Didn’t they recently ask for a reduction in fees?
J. Scott Evans
408.536.5336 (tel)
345 Park Avenue, Mail Stop W11-544
Director, Associate General Counsel
408.709.6162 (cell)
San Jose, CA, 95110, USA
Adobe. Make It an Experience.
jsevans at adobe.com
www.adobe.com
On 4/14/17, 2:54 PM, "gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of George Kirikos" <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of icann at leap.com> wrote:
Just to correct my prior email, .pro technically wasn't a "sponsored" TLD.
But, the other ones that were sponsored weren't very successful
(.post, .aero, .asia, .jobs. mobi, .xxx etc.).
Sincerely,
George
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 4:47 PM, George Kirikos <icann at leap.com> wrote:
> Hi J. Scott,
>
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 4:22 PM, J. Scott Evans via gnso-rpm-wg
> <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org> wrote:
>> My suggestion would be that either we have sponsored TLDs with up front verification or we have a challenge system whereby the challenging party that wants to us the string for a non-infringing purpose could obtain the domain name; provided, however that their use was subject to the requirement that they stick to the stated non-infringing purpose. Failure to do so is a breach of the TOS and the Registry would takedown the domain name if it received a valid complaint. Similar to DMCA.
>
> We're trying to achieve the same result, which I see as promising.
>
> With respect, it's unfortunate that sponsored TLDs turned out be a
> disaster. Either they were outright gamed (e.g. people renting out
> their ".pro" qualifications/credentials/whatever), or domains were
> mopped up by insiders (e.g. .travel), etc.
>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdomainnamewire.com%2F2008%2F02%2F22%2Ftheglobecom-to-sell-travel-domain-name-registry%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce9526ccc5d60494f64c108d48380d39a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636278036711878269&sdata=32J%2Bjvt04Er7l95pOnnPyVi1dVhcUh%2FOej7zh%2BC1UrM%3D&reserved=0
>
> With a "challenge" system, what if there were multiple challengers?
> Who gets the domain name? What if the sunrise registrant wants the
> domain name more than the "challenger(s)" does(do)? Who gets it?
>
> What I proposed (auction system in landrush, which is how landrushes
> tend to operate anyhow; i.e. just eliminate the sunrise and go
> straight to landrush) is entire neutral and "clean." The answers to
> the above questions are simple: money.
>
> No need to reinvent the wheel here. Money has always been the way to
> solve these allocation issues for scarce resources. Once you start
> interfering in that (to suggest that someone is "more deserving" of
> the asset), it invites the gaming we're seeing.
>
> It'd be interesting to know the stats on average domains registered in
> sunrise, by the way, if anyone has those handy. i.e. we know that on
> average 130 per TLD are registered in sunrise. How many more are being
> registered in landrush, on average?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> 416-588-0269
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leap.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce9526ccc5d60494f64c108d48380d39a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636278036711888278&sdata=mlNa0raqZ3qm4wRm3g19oFaG90rDxFawIkAEEoPIcmE%3D&reserved=0
_______________________________________________
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-rpm-wg&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce9526ccc5d60494f64c108d48380d39a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636278036711888278&sdata=XXEBV5iIo02Yfe51FkwktsL5qpgXUKGKcfvfTWioCIA%3D&reserved=0
More information about the gnso-rpm-wg
mailing list