[council] Relationship between contracts and existing and new gTLDs

[Bruce Tonkin]

Hello All,

For the purposes of considering PDP-Dec05 (new gTLDs) and PDP-Feb06
(policy guiding contractual terms for gTLDs), we should consider that
over the lifetime of a gTLD that there may be different parties
operating that TLD.

For existing TLDs, we have seen one example of a TLD transferred from
one party to another - ie .org used to be operated by Verisign, and is
now operated by PIR.

In future a gTLD operator may decide that that no longer wish to operate
a gTLD, and the ICANN Board could decide to allocate that TLD to another
party.

PDP-Dec05 is considering policy issues around new gTLDs - including what
contractual terms are appropriate.

PDP-Feb06 is considering policy that can affect contract terms of
agreements for the existing TLDs.  However new policy in this area may
only affect a future operator of an existing TLD rather than an existing
operator (unless that operator agrees) of an existing TLD, as policies
in this area may fall outside of the "Consensus Policy" definition in
the existing contracts.

The outcomes of PDP-FGeb06 can affect a contract renegotiation.   For
example if an existing operator has a term of 4 years, and the new ICANN
policy requires a term of 1 year, than the existing operator would not
be able to negotiate for a term longer than 4 years but could keep their
current term of four years.


Regards,
Bruce Tonkin