Page History
...
- Board Resolution 2010.03.12.46-47 clearly expressed the need to ensure that the New gTLD Program is inclusive. Much of the ICANN global community, particularly from developing regions, has raised its hopes and expectations with this decision.
- With every new gTLD application round, the market competitive disadvantage increases. ICANN should not cause or allow the New gTLD Program to further the gap in gTLD Registry representation from other regions. The diversity, competition and innovation the New gTLD Program could bring should be an opportunity to all around the world since the Internet is a global resource that belongs to all. ICANN has the obligation to look closely into this issue and fulfill its responsibility to serve the global public interest by allowing accessibility and competition for all around the world.
- There is no indication whether, in subsequent rounds, fees will be reduced and, in case there is any reduction, by how much, therefore there is no benefit in waiting.
- Informal market research by some of the WG members indicates there is built-up demand for new gTLDs, particularly including IDN gTLDs. There is expectation for a considerable number of applications. One of the main concerns is that, without some sort of assistance program, the most obvious and valuable names (ASCII and IDNs), will be taken by wealthy investors. This may limit opportunities in developing regions, for local community institutions and developing country entrepreneurs. The majority of Of the current 21 New gTLD Registries, 18 are located in USA or Europe. There is one in Hong Kong and absolutely none in a developing countryand three are in western Europe (with one having a sales/marketing presence in Asia). None are located anywhere else.
- While, per policy, ICANN plans for a second round, the timeline for this to happen is, at best, uncertain. Experiences from previous rounds add to the uncertainty. For example, ICANN communicated during the last round that this was to be followed soon by new rounds, nevertheless, it is taking almost a decade for a new round to materialise. Since ICANN cannot give guarantees and certainty of when future rounds will take place, making those who cannot afford to participate in the program during this round due to the current elevated fees is perceived as an unfair and non-inclusive treatme
...
- Least developed countries: category 199;
- Landlocked Developing Countries: category 432; or
- Small Island Developing States: category 722.
Wiki Markup \[ possibly \-\- per EBW and pending refinement \-\- a designation that would be inclusive of indigenous groups in developed economies as well as within non-national entities (ie, Palestine) \]
Application formula
The WG proposes that the following formula be applied to the above-stated criteria:
In order to be eligible for support under this program, an application MUST:
- Demonstrate financial need (as determined in 3.1) as well as a sustainability plan
- Demonstrate need by and service to a community (as determined by 3.3 or 3.4 or 3.5)
- Certify that its corporate structure is not ineligible according to 3.2
Part 4 - What benefits do qualified applicants receive?
...
