[gtld-tech] [tmch-tech] RPM Requirement of Supporting Claims Service for Release or Allocation of Reserved Domain Names

Nic Steinbach nic at name.com
Mon May 19 14:32:04 UTC 2014

It would be nice to have a standard way of addressing this - supporting
claims indefinitely, pursuing an alternate method like the one mentioned by
Roy or any other solution - but I think given the TLD roll out so far
standardization across all platforms seems unlikely. A PDP would not have
tangible results before some registries would like to pursue this path. I
would be surprised if a registry didn't implement a delayed reserved
rollout along these lines this quarter and it will only pick from there.

Instead registries need to realize the development burdens on registry
operators and registrars so that there reserved rollout is as standard as
possible and enticing enough to make these burdens worthwhile. Given the
nature of these names - it is certainly possible to make the program
enticing. I would guess that as least within a registry operator, the
mechanism for addressing both the claims and the validation piece that goes
along with this would be standard.

We fully expect to support various models as long as the benefits and
requirements are communicated clearly and translate to a sound business
decision for all parties involved.

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:03 AM, Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at nic.br> wrote:

> Seth,
> Have you been able to use GDD Portal to get eternal claims service ? It
> seems to require a fixed date when submitting TLD Startup Info...
> Rubens
> Em 19/05/2014, à(s) 11:00:000, Seth Goldman <sethamin at google.com>
> escreveu:
> We are planning to offer an eternal claims service on all our TLDs. It's
> better for trademark holders, plus it's operationally simpler.
> Seth
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Gould, James <JGould at verisign.com> wrote:
>>  According to section 2.4.3 of the Rights Protection Mechanism (RPM)
>> Requirements, it states:
>>  If Registry Operator reserves a domain name from registration in
>> accordance with Section 2.6 of the Agreement and Specification 5 of the
>> Agreement and thereafter (i) releases for Allocation or registration such
>> reserved domain name at any time prior to the start date of the Claims
>> Period, such domain name MUST be treated like any other domain name for any
>> applicable Sunrise Period, Limited Registration Period, Launch Program or
>> Claims Period, or (ii) *releases for Allocation or registration such
>> reserved domain name at any time following the start date of the Claims
>> Period, such domain name MUST be subject to the Claims Services (as defined
>> in Section 3) for a period of ninety (90) calendar days following the date
>> Registry Operator releases such domain name for registration as long as the
>> Trademark Clearinghouse (or any ICANN-designated successor thereto) remains
>> in operation. *
>>    For registries that plan on releasing domain names after the Claims
>> Period, such as to support the release of premium domain names or 2
>> character domain names, they will have to support the Claims Services well
>> past the Claims Period (potentially years).  This represents a costly
>> burden to the registries having to indefinitely download the DNL list,
>> support the claims check, validating the domain creates against the DNL
>> list for a subset of domain names, and support the TMCH LORDN interface.
>>  This also represents a costly burden to registrars or discourages
>> registrar participation in supporting the release of reserved domain names.
>>  The registrars would need to know to use the claims check, use the CNIS
>> for presenting the claims notice, and passing the claims acknowledgement
>> indefinitely.
>>  Since this is a complex issue impacting registries and registrars, what
>> approaches are being considered?  Do the registries and registrars have any
>> issues with supporting the Claims Service indefinitely?
>>  Please respond with your thoughts and concerns.
>>  Thanks,
>>  --
>> JG
>> <3CA91A0B-A6C1-43A5-AC92-8E23C9AD1B74[99].png>
>> James Gould
>> Principal Software Engineer
>> jgould at verisign.com
>> 703-948-3271 (Office)
>> 12061 Bluemont Way
>> Reston, VA 20190
>> VerisignInc.com
>>  “This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use
>> of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain
>> information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and
>> exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as
>> attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
>> hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
>> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
>> message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message
>> immediately.”

*Nic Steinbach*
Strategic Relationship Manager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gtld-tech/attachments/20140519/74029636/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the gtld-tech mailing list