[Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: ICANN Application Status

Wed Oct 28 08:20:16 UTC 2020

Hi Anne,

In response to your request, here is the text of the relevant implementation guidance:

Implementation Guidance 3.4: Where a TLD has already been delegated, no application for that string will be allowed for a string in a subsequent round.

It should in general not be possible to apply for a string that is still being processed from a previous application round, i.e.

  *   If there is an application that has a status of “Active”, “Applicant Support”, “In Contracting”, “On-hold” or “In PDT”, a new application for that string will not be allowed in a subsequent round.
However,

  *   If all applications for a particular string have been Withdrawn, meaning the string has not been delegated, new applications for the string will be allowed in a subsequent round.
  *   If all applications for a given string have a status of “Will Not Proceed”, an application for the TLD will only be allowed if:
     *   All appeals and/or accountability mechanisms have proceeded through final disposition and no applications for the string have succeeded in such appeals and/or accountability mechanisms; or
     *   All applicable time limitations (statute of limitations) have expired such that all applicants for a particular string would not be in a position to file an appeal or accountability mechanism with respect to the string.
  *   If all applications for a given string have a status of “Not Approved”, an application for the TLD string will only be allowed if:
     *   All appeals and/or accountability mechanisms have proceeded through final disposition and no applications for the string have succeeded in such appeals and/or accountability mechanisms; or ○ All applicable time limitations (statute of limitations) have expired such that all applicants for a particular string would not be in a position to file an appeal or accountability mechanism with respect to the string; and
     *   The ICANN Board has not approved new policies or procedures that would allow one or more of the applicants from the prior round to cure the reasons for which it was placed in the “Not Approved” category, but has approved new policies or procedures that would allow an applicant to apply for the string in any subsequent round. In the event that there are new policies or procedures put into place which would allow applications for strings which were “Not Approved” in a prior round, the ICANN Board must make a determination as to whether the applicants in the prior round have any preferential rights for those strings if such prior applicants commit to adopt such new policies or procedures at the time such policies or procedures are put into place.

In addition,

  *   If a registry operator has terminated its Registry Agreement and (i) the TLD has not been reassigned to a different registry operator, and (ii) in the case of a Specification 13 Brand TLD, it is more than 2 years following the Expiration Date (See RA Section 4.5(a)), then applications will be allowed to be submitted during a subsequent round.

Kind regards,
Emily

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman at lrrc.com>
Date: Wednesday, 28 October 2020 at 01:32
To: "gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: ICANN Application Status

Hi all,
I listened to the Zoom from the call.  Regarding General Comments Topics 1-8 and the comment from Nameshop – Item 23 in relation to preventing new applications for the same string about “checking with the applicant”  -  I am attaching the ICANN definitions of “Will Not Proceed” and “Not Approved” as well as the current lists of 2012 applications which fall in those categories.   These may be illustrative even though 2012 applications are outside the scope of this PDP.  Please remind me, did the WG say we are not prohibiting applications in these categories?  Or are they prohibited?  (I think Justine did a lot of drafting on this issue.)

I understand we should be discussing this on the list and also later in connection with “Applications Assessed in Rounds.”  I don’t know if the ICANN definitions would have to change for future rounds where new appeal processes are put in place.  This will have to be super clear in the Applicant Guidebook for the next round.

I have always been concerned that no “back-up” applications for certain strings creates a situation where an applicant can prevent third parties from applying and essentially effect a “freeze” on a TLD string while negotiating with ICANN from strength.  For example, an applicant could apply in the next round for numerous Closed Generic strings and take the position that no other applicant in subsequent rounds could apply for that string while it is negotiating and contesting ICANN decisions not to delegate Closed Generics.  Not sure where we came out on this, but I tend to agree with Alan Greenberg’s comment on the call that the determination as to whether subsequent applications for the same string are “blocked” has to be made by ICANN.  Of course that determination itself could be subject to Request for Reconsideration and Independent Review Panel so this is very tricky.

Regarding Greg Shatan’s comment, I think Nameshop had an application for .idn that was changed to .internet.  I am not sure of the status at this point.

Anne
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese

Of Counsel

520.629.4428 office

520.879.4725 fax

AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>

_____________________________

[cid:image001.png at 01D6AD0B.8BB32FB0]

Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP

One South Church Avenue, Suite 2000

Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611

lrrc.com [lrrc.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/lrrc.com/__;!!PtGJab4!qdVEW4uySPkfubrSwmoLjbZ2KPhLF6ZkJIRgFYy7M6SGdhFD13Fneevzt0EUqMDiunGWdxCC9A$>

[cid:image002.jpg at 01D6AD0B.8BB32FB0]

Because what matters

to you, matters to us.™

________________________________

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20201028/ba16fb2d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6525 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20201028/ba16fb2d/image001-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2462 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20201028/ba16fb2d/image002-0001.jpg>