[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Use Requirement for 2nd round new gTLDs

[lists at christopherwilkinson.eu]

Good evening:

I support the general direction of Alexander’s proposal: to strongly discourage, indeed penalise, the warehousing of un-used strings.
However, ten years is far too long for these purposes.

The proposal does not address the specific risk of geo-names Registries (a) accumulating geo-names for speculative purposes and (b) incorporating the Registries outside the jurisdiction of the countries concerned.  These conditions are open to unacceptable abuses, and long running disputes in the future.

CW





> On 20 Nov 2019, at 17:49, Alexander Schubert <alexander at schubert.berlin <mailto:alexander at schubert.berlin>> wrote:
> 
> Dear Jeff,
>  
> As discussed on the call yesterday here a brief suggestion regarding a “use requirement”. First a summary of my suggestion:
>  
> The new RA (Registry Agreement) should contain a clause that denies contract renewal if registries have not had a Sunrise registration phase (Spec-13 Brand Registries would be exempted from this clause).
>  
> Here my rationale for this:
>  
> Obviously the 2007 PDP demanded a use requirement. Hence currently registries face steep penalties for not contracting (application will be withdrawn) and not testing/entering the root (cancelation of the contract). 
>  
> Let’s be cognizant of the 3 gTLD categories that emerged in 2012:
> 1.      Spec 13 gTLDs (Brands)
> 2.      Geo gTLDs (mainly cities)
> 3.      All others 
>  
> We can’t always find “one size fits all” solutions – and claim that  in absence of a global solution we will not create ANY solution at all. That said: I can’t speak for the category 1. And as Martin Sutton said on the Monday GNSO call: if “use” was defined by “number of domains”: nothing more easy than registering a number of domains. So yes: for brand gTLDs it’s nifty to “define” a “use requirement” – maybe someone else can come up with a solution for Spec-13 registries.
>  
> BUT: For categories 2 and 3 I think the solution is simple! We already steeply penalize if the prospective registry doesn’t contract or engage in testing. There are grace periods to do so (I think 9 month). We could use the same grace period for “startup” – which is opening the string up for registrations in Sunrise!
>  
> At BARE minimum we should put into the new RA (Registry Agreement) that failure for categories 2 and 3 (non-Spec-13 registries) to startup (start sunrise) WILL be a reason to deny contract renewal! A DECADE of not starting up should be a clear sign of failure. 
>  
> This solution is NOT impacting Spec 13 applicants. We can discuss separately whether or not we wish to add a “use requirement” for them as well. This solution would also NOT impact 2012 round new gTLDs.
>  
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Alexander.berlin
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg <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 <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <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/20191121/f735f2d7/attachment.html>