This is the wiki page for At-Large comments on "Limited Public Interest" and "Community Objection" Grounds for multiple gTLD strings by RJ RJ Glass

The ALAC has standing to object to a gTLD application on "Limited Public Interest Objection Grounds and community objection grounds

NOTE: You must be logged in to post comments. If you do not have a wiki account, please email your comment to the gTLD RG group at  newgtldrg@icann.org.

The gTLD RG reserves the right to remove comments that do not adhere to ICANN's Expected Standards of Behavior and Open Comment Forum Process and Standards.

 

  • No labels

2 Comments

  1. Dev Anand Teelucksingh

    Comment from RJ Glass http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-January/000210.html :

    Comment on new gTLD strings
    America@Large

    With regard to the applications for new gTLD strings, relative to trademarks and global DNS resolvability, we would like to make the following statement:

    In charting the course for future TLD resolvability, and inclusion in the root, we feel it prudent to exercise caution and restraint over the inclusion of new TLD strings. Of the current 1930 applications submitted for given strings, there are 3 primary categories of these strings, 1) those who are creating advancements in DNS/registry technology, 2) those who are creating a DNS/registry for promotion of their trademark, 3) those who are vying to prevent others from creating a DNS/registry.

    As such, ICANN’s mission is to, “coordinate, at the overall level, the global Internet's systems of unique identifiers, and in particular to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems,” as stated in the by-laws.  One of ICANN’s core values is stated as, “preserving and enhancing the operational stability, reliability, security, and global interoperability of the Internet.”  Therefore, in selecting appropriate strings to be included in the root, we feel it is important to lean toward improvement in the DNS/registry technology, while leaning away from those who are creating a DNS/registry for promotion of their trademark, as well as those who are vying to prevent others from creating a DNS/registry.

    In other words, some applicants are interested in creating gTLD strings for the sole purpose of the promotion of their brand, or preventing others from doing as such.  These strings do nothing to enhance the operational stability, reliability, security, and global interoperability of the Internet.  Rather, they will inevitably add confusion to the DNS system and decrease the overall value of the DNS system, against the founding principles of ICANN itself.  On the other hand, some gTLD strings seem to have a purpose of advancing and improving the DNS system through innovation, primarily by segmenting traffic and adding value to the DNS/registry technology.

    Therefore, we urge consideration of this basis for advancement.  We thus urge the gTLD RG to lean toward advancement of technology, while leaning away from allowing increased confusion.  In acting hastily, and encouraging confusion in the marketplace, we thereby decrease the value of the Internet as a whole.  Conversely, by encouraging technological advancements and innovation in these strings, we add value to the Internet as a whole, as well as to the relevancy of ICANN itself.


    Respectfully Submitted,

    RJ Glass
    America at Large

  2. Dev Anand Teelucksingh

    The New gTLD Review Group (gTLD RG) had a conference call on Monday January 21 2013 (https://community.icann.org/x/DwJlAg) and made a decision as follows:

    • This comment is directed towards the new gTLD program. Thus, no concerns on limited public interest or community objections were raised for a particular new gTLD application.
    • The gTLD RG acknowledges RJ Glass's comments about the new gTLD program  and will bring it to the attention of the New gTLD WG for their consideration.