Background Material on ICANN's Geographic Regions
See At-Large Community Workspace on ICANN's Geographic Regions
Background Material on New gTLDs
- Board resolution 20:
At the ICANN meeting in Nairobi on 12 March 2010, the ICANN Board of Directors adopted the following resolution:
"20. Support for Applicants Requesting New gTLD Applicants
Whereas, the launch of the New gTLD Program will bring fundamental change to the marketplace, including competition and innovation;
Whereas, the evolution of relationships and restrictions on relationships between registries and registrars have been a center of discussion and analysis;
Whereas, the introduction of new gTLDs will bring change and opportunity for innovation, new services and benefits for users and registrants;
Whereas, ICANN aims to ensure that the New gTLD Program is inclusive, along the lines of the organization's strategic objectives;
Whereas, ICANN has a requirement to recover the costs of new gTLD applications and on-going services to new gTLDs; and
Whereas numerous stakeholders have, on various occasions, expressed concern about the cost of applying for new gTLDs, and suggested that these costs might hinder applicants requiring assistance, especially those from developing countries.
Resolved (2010.03.12.46), the Board recognizes the importance of an inclusive New gTLD Program.
Resolved (2010.03.12.47), the Board requests stakeholders to work through their SOs and ACs, and form a Working Group to develop a sustainable approach to providing support to applicants requiring assistance in applying for and operating new gTLDs ."
- Draft JAS SO/AC Working Group Charter:
Preamble:
The Joint SO/AC Working Group on New gTLD Applicant Support shall evaluate and propose recommendations regarding specific support to new gTLD applicants in justified cases. The working group expects to identify suitable criteria for provision of such support, to identify suitable support forms and to identify potential providers of such support. However, there is no presumption that the outcome will imply any particular governing structure. Accordingly, if the recommendations indicate that the preferred solutions are of a voluntary nature, the criteria and other provisions arrived at in line with the objectives below will solely serve as advice to the parties concerned. The objectives are not listed in any priority order. An overall consideration is that the outcomes of the WG should not lead to delays of the New gTLD process.
Objective 1:
To identify suitable criteria that new gTLD applicants must fulfill to qualify for dedicated support. The criteria may be different for different types of support identified in line with Objective 2 and 3 below.
Objective 2:
To identify how the application fee can be reduced and/or subsidized to accommodate applicants that fulfill appropriate criteria to qualify for this benefit, in keeping with the principle of full cost recovery of the application process costs.
Objective 3:
To identify what kinds of support (e.g. technical assistance, organizational assistance, financial assistance, fee reduction) and support timelines (e.g. support for the application period only, continuous support) are appropriate for new gTLD applicants fulfilling identified criteria.
Objective 4:
To identify potential providers of the identified kinds of support as well as appropriate mechanisms to enable support provisioning.
Objective 5:
To identify conditions and mechanisms required to minimize the risk of inappropriate access to support.
Operating procedures for the Working Group:
The Working Group will operate according to the interim working group guidelines set out in the Draft Working guidelines of 5 Feb 2010
