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

Fri Nov 22 17:11:18 UTC 2019

Kathy,

What did I misquote?

You said:  “Alexander's proposal below seems fundamental and basic, and almost incontrovertible”

I said: “I  don’t think  that this proposal is fundamental, basic, or incontrovertible”

Do you object to my use of “or” instead of “and”?

Marc H. Trachtenberg
Shareholder
Greenberg Traurig, LLP | 77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL 60601
Tel 312.456.1020
Mobile 773.677.3305
trac at gtlaw.com<mailto:trac at gtlaw.com> | www.gtlaw.com<http://www.gtlaw.com/>

[Greenberg Traurig]

From: Kathy Kleiman [mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com]
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2019 11:06 AM
To: Trachtenberg, Marc H. (Shld-Chi-IP-Tech) <trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com>; gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Use Requirement for 2nd round new gTLDs

Hi Marc, If you are going to quote me, I would ask that you please do it accurately.

As regards your point below, it sounds like the gTLD operator IS using the gTLD space, as another commenter pointed out.

Kathy
On 11/21/2019 2:28 PM, trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com> wrote:
Kathy,

I  don’t think  that this proposal is fundamental, basic, or incontrovertible and you should be careful about using words like “incontrovertible” to describe things that are your opinion.  First, why should someone lose their gTLD if they are still figuring out their business model or facing some challenges in implementation?

Second, what does “use” mean?  What if a gTLD operator wanted to operate a business model that was not based on selling domain names – for example a social network or other platform providing services – and wanted the gTLD to be able to operate this platform in a secure space and just used one promotional second level name so that users could access the platform but would not offer second levels to third parties?  That would be quite innovative, and it has been stated innumerable times that one of the purposes of the new gTLD program was to foster innovation in the domain name space.  While there hasn’t been much innovation in new gTLDs, Alex’s proposal will ensure that there never will be and the only business model allowed for gTLDs other than .brands will be selling names.   There is no innate incontrovertible human right to be able to register any domain name in any gTLD and as Kristine pointed out, Alex’s proposal attempts to solve a problem that doesn’t exist.

Best regards,

Marc H. Trachtenberg
Shareholder
Greenberg Traurig, LLP | 77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL 60601
Tel 312.456.1020
Mobile 773.677.3305
trac at gtlaw.com<mailto:trac at gtlaw.com> | www.gtlaw.com<http://www.gtlaw.com/>

[Greenberg Traurig]

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 12:42 PM
To: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Use Requirement for 2nd round new gTLDs

*EXTERNAL TO GT*

Alexander's proposal below seems fundamental and basic, and almost incontrovertible. If you are going to ask for a gTLD space, use it.  That makes sense and is a underlying premise of much of the Applicant Guidebook with its roll-out provisions.

I support.

Best, Kathy
On 11/20/2019 11:49 AM, Alexander Schubert 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Dnewgtld-2Dwg&d=DwIGaQ&c=2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg&r=UUOs32AZjl8vCovTaI3_D-BnBrwtt5n12_lt3qDEJLE&m=J0PSwvEtX4tJesaYqUL7Y9tBanSvwygxcqC13HuPKpE&s=Mr4b5nzKAkD7j7CuUMjiQ25yaszKIu-ZE6Jd3HEf6EA&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Dnewgtld-2Dwg&d=DwMDaQ&c=2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg&r=L7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c&m=uV1pyX-mNVD9P4TlLUWeknvls7QOv0a4lnbrjLruCZg&s=EVH2cDAg5pRW-i9jlVTCBo4AJqjNzKMlBxOYXY18B3s&e=>

_______________________________________________

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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwIGaQ&c=2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg&r=UUOs32AZjl8vCovTaI3_D-BnBrwtt5n12_lt3qDEJLE&m=J0PSwvEtX4tJesaYqUL7Y9tBanSvwygxcqC13HuPKpE&s=7Nx4_EItxrG6FR-rtvGhqpoAoeVRRENvpw0BrXtDpNc&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMDaQ&c=2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg&r=L7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c&m=uV1pyX-mNVD9P4TlLUWeknvls7QOv0a4lnbrjLruCZg&s=JxweizR3VC-nDXRMCt3dyCD1otZ5qOKyB-8v4G7dKCo&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwIGaQ&c=2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg&r=UUOs32AZjl8vCovTaI3_D-BnBrwtt5n12_lt3qDEJLE&m=J0PSwvEtX4tJesaYqUL7Y9tBanSvwygxcqC13HuPKpE&s=V57-cvrIHEBI3SlbZMgdT8fQ3X8ERLgiCMKNoNYGDPY&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMDaQ&c=2s2mvbfY0UoSKkl6_Ol9wg&r=L7MB7eHT-UoCXD4iA3c7Sm3JrKXt7T1dG3NjBzCxm1c&m=uV1pyX-mNVD9P4TlLUWeknvls7QOv0a4lnbrjLruCZg&s=k8UfJ6pXDHZ2XcYf_zkvOlGPGCsU42OXE_xY0avPxho&e=>). 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.

________________________________
If you are not an intended recipient of confidential and privileged information in this email, please delete it, notify us immediately at postmaster at gtlaw.com<mailto:postmaster at gtlaw.com>, and do not use or disseminate the information.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20191122/3bb62aeb/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6399 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20191122/3bb62aeb/image001-0001.jpg>