Trademark Claims Question #2 2a. Is there a use case for exempting a gTLD that is approved in subsequent expansion rounds from the requirement of a mandatory Claims Period due to the particular nature of that gTLD? Such type of gTLD might include: (i) “highly regulated” TLDs that have stringent requirements for registering entities, on the order of .bank; and/or (ii) “Dot Brand” TLDs whose proposed registration model demonstrates that the use of a Trademark Claims Service is unnecessary. 2b. If the Working Group recommends exemption language, what are the appropriate guardrails ICANN should use when granting the exception (e.g. Single-registrant? Highly-regulated or manually hand-registered domains[1]? Something else?)? Note: This question is related to Trademark Claims Recommendations #4 and #5. |
Context:
Some Working Group members (not the entire Working Group) recommended that public comment be sought on this question. Some Working Group members believe that some future TLDs should be exempt from the mandatory Trademark Claims Period and suggested seeking public comment on whether there is a use case for exempting a TLD due to the particular nature of the TLD, as well as any concerns about exempting those TLDs.
[1] Manually hand-registered domains literally refer to the domains registered manually at a registrar by hand. In other words, it is the practice of registering a new domain name without the use of automated robots or automated computer systems that search for and register domain names; those domain names are purchased new and not on an after-market system. In the context of Trademark Claims Question #2, it refers to the domain name that is registered manually following the specific registry policy.
